Shop now Shop now Shop Clothing clo_fly_aw15_NA_shoes Shop All Shop All Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop Amazon Fire TV Shop now Shop Fire HD 6 Shop Kindle Voyage Shop Now Shop now
Customer Review

257 of 260 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A truly superb scanner for film and photographs, 27 April 2006
This review is from: Epson Perfection V700 Photo Scanner (Electronics)
This is a superb 6,400 dpi scanner for 35mm film, 120 negatives, 1/4 plate negatives, and can scan any film size to A4. The resolution of the scanner is as good as a dedicated Nikon 4,000 dpi scanner and noticeably sharper than the admittedly cheaper Epson 4990 Photo and Canon 9950F flatbed film scanners (at 100% mag). With it's 'hight adjusters' for the slide holders it's a bit fiddly to use, but the results are simply first rate. See it fully reviewed at [...] The scanner comes with a very good twain interface and Silverfast SE, plus Photoshop Elements 3 (not 4). It deserves Photoshop CS2 though, if you afford it.

The V700 can scan 12 slides or 24 negatives in one go, scan time is in minutes per frame. There are also 120 and 4x5" negative holders, plus an A4 film area guide for full platter negative scans (plus a clip on white matt for A4 reflective photograph & document scans). Digital ICE (Kodak) infra-red scan hardware is included that eliminates dust and scratches from old film (although it can soften the image quality at high settings and add the odd artefact). I don't get much improvement in scan quality going above 3,200 dpi or to 48-bit colour as the scanner is clearly exceeding the grain size and quality of my old SLR slide film (mainly 100 ASA Agfachrome CS and older Kodachrome). Scanning of details in shadows is very good, but the image benefits from Photoshop CS's shadow/highlight utility to lighten these regions (otherwise shadows can be too dark). Photoshop elements 3 [supplied] has a similar tool, but I use Photoshop CS.

Perhaps the only reason not to buy this superb scanner is that the 'improved optics' of it's big sister, the V750 Pro, may tempt you even more when it's soon released - that will cost another £150 over this V700 though. Otherwise, an excellent scanner that should be at the top of any shortlist. In fact I can't really tell any difference in resolution between scans on this scanner and those from an [8,000dpi] £10,000 Imacon Flextight 484 - although the V700 images need far more twain and post-scan Photoshop tweaking to match the Flextight ones and naturally this consumer V700 does scan at far slower speeds. This scanner obviously does great reflective scans as well, but naturally has few advantages over far cheaper models if you don't want to scan film or photographs.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Tracked by 3 customers

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 13 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 5 Nov 2008 18:59:17 GMT
Last edited by the author on 5 Nov 2008 19:01:14 GMT
artist girl says:
Hi Keith
I'm thinking of buying this scanner for illustration work, how does it scan oranges and reds? These two colours I find the most difficult to scan and at the moment my (cheaper) scanner doesn't differentiate between the two. I look forward to hearing your reply. Thanks......Charlie

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jan 2010 00:24:25 GMT
Last edited by the author on 31 Jul 2011 14:14:19 BDT
Charlie-CJ says:
Thanks to David's comments below it appears this V700 is now shipping with Elements 7, a far superior version than the Photoshop Elements 3 I got years ago [as I write Photoshop Elements 9 is the latest version, and Elements 7 is almost as good]. Given that scanning film is now a rather niche activity for consumers, it seems unlikely these V700 and V750 consumer & semi-pro A4 film scanners are going to be improved on by Epson in the near future [they has been around for years now]. I've tried updating my review more than once, but so far [June 2011] it's not been changed by Amazon, so I've added the comments Here: website has had a revamp so it's tricky to find the review of the V700/V750 - the link to the old part of the website and scanner review is:

PS. Four years on the scanner is still running fine [Dec 2010], but then it's now scanned all the film it has to and mostly sits idly on it's shelf. I keep a plastic sheet over it when not in use [similar to a microscope cover]. It has a few minor dents in the lid from the kids dropping stuff on it, but still works fine. Our works Epson V750 scanner used for scanning glass microscope slides at 6,400 dpi is also working perfectly after 4 years constant use.

With the V700's 'height adjusters' for the slide holders it's a bit fiddly to use, and the film holders are a little lightweight [some replace them with 'Doug Fisher' versions] , but the results are simply first rate [the fixed focus means that the film must be a set distance from the platen or more fuzz]. Although this Epson 700 can easily scan colour negatives, results can be slightly dissapointing compared to semi-pro 35mm colour slides - as negatives, particularly the old 400 ASA 'free film' variety, weren't manufactured to enlarge much beyond A4 colour prints. Best image scan results will generally be obtained with 50/100 ASA semi-pro colour 35mm slides and large format B&W negatives [e.g. 120 film].

Perhaps the only reason not to buy this superb scanner is that the 'improved optics' [an anti-reflection 'no ghosting' lens coating] of it's big sister, the V750 Pro, may tempt you as it comes with more bundled stuff, such as Monaco EZ/IT8 & colour print/film targets for colour correction, and upmarket Silverfast Ai not SE, that would cost another £150 for this V700. Although apparently the V750 scan images aren't actually much different to this V700s efforts [as the V700 is so good], and you still get the same flimsy film holders. I have upgraded to Silverfast Ai, but to be honest it's clunky to use, and I prefer the simpler supplied Epson twain interface - the multiple scanning option of Silverfast adds scan time rather than quality to the scans.

Otherwise, the Epson V700 is an excellent scanner that should be at the top of any shortlist, although it is actually a budget film scanner for 6,400 dpi and A4 film, so don't expect Nikon 9000 build quality. But it delivers the goods. In fact I can't really tell any difference in resolution between scans on this scanner and those from an [8,000dpi] £10,000 Imacon Flextight 484 - although the V700 images need far more twain and post-scan Photoshop tweaking to match the Flextight ones and naturally this consumer V700 does scan at far slower speeds. Admittedly the 50 ASA 35mm slide film grain itself is certainly in far sharper focus on the Flextight scans, but that adds zilch to any photo detail. It also costs a heck of a lot more to scan via a Flextight [Hasselblad] scanner and a reprographics dept [£s per slide].

Do look after your scanned images - archiving and keeping digital files on a 7,200rpm hard drive for 50 years is a lot more challenging than storing the film/slides in the wardrobe for that period. I had so many folders called 'Epson Scans', 'Espon Scan jpg' etc that seemed identical, I appear to have deleted 100s of slide scans in error [still as least I can scan them again]. I now save to max res jpg as large Tiff files seem prone to corruption [and fill up the hard drive alarmingly] - might have used the better jp2 format these days but it's still less universal.


Hi Charlie [sorry for late reply, hadn't noticed the 'comments' section] - I've never noticed a problem with orange and reds with scanning 35mm colour slide film [red dyes are generally the last to fade], although putting the film back through a series of optics for the second time will always produce an inferior image, just as the first exposure lost a large amount of detail when capturing the original scene [thats why our film scans are equivalent to a 20 megapixel camera, we need resolution that to recover detail]. Viewing the original slide via a 25x magnifier and light box, the scanned images colour and detail on the PC monitor can easily be adjusted to that similar to that seen the original slide [or artwork], i.e. colour balance and detail in shadows [shadow/highlight]. Without proper colour calibration targets colours may be a tad oversaturated when scanning, although generally this can be corrected in Photoshop. The V750 Pro scanner will score on that point as it comes with proper colour correction targets - but in terms of absolute resolution this V700 isn't very different to it's expensive brother.

You do need a colour correction target for accurate scan colours [and colour correction needs to be seperately applied to the scanner, printer and PC monitor]. However as cameras these days come with 'vivid/cool/warm/Warhol' colour correction options, many just adjust colour balance to taste [a lot of original film/photos are unlikely to be colour correct anyway - e.g. there was no 'white balance' correction button on an old film based camera body and vintage film colour dyes are prone to fading with time]. See for more details.

To calibrate a PC monitor to correctly show scanned and photo colours exactly as they should be, you should ideally use an optical detector placed against the screen, [pro versions cost around £300, although there are cheaper on offer: see Pantone Huey and the Spyder 3 Pro (PC/Mac) as well as needing a decent semi-pro IPS PC monitor - so accurate colours don't come cheap [your scanner may be distinguishing the colours correctly, but it's unlikely your uncalibrated PC monitor will be showing them correctly]. As well as colour correction, image brightness and contrast need to be right or everything will be lost in shadows or highlights.

As I use the V700 mainly as a 6,400 dpi [transmission] negative/slide film scanner I've not really worried about it's absolute scanning quality in reflective mode, as it's massively over-engineered for this in any case - the 'high' price of this flatbed scanner is really for this 35mm & large format negative film scanning mode. A sub-£100 scanner will be fine for most reflective scans at home, as you're not likely to scan an A4 sheet or photo print above 1,200 dpi. The V700 is really designed more for resolution than fastidious correct colour correction [cameras have vivid/cool/'normal' colour options in any case]. These scanners, even the Epson 750 Pro, are 'semi-professional' for working copies and not designed for commercial print runs - flatbed scanner prices for those very serious about accurate colours can go up to £30,000 [they also scan a lot faster]. If you are also serious about red/orange differentiation, ideally check out the flatbed scanners at a reprographics department and compare with output from this V700/V750.

We mostly use a V700 for scanning a lot of largish format B&W electron microscope negative film, where we naturally have no colour problems - few if any consumer hi-res scanners can go to an A4 negative film size, so the Epson V700/V750 is fairly unique in that department now than Canon have dropped out of the consumer flatbed large format film scanning market. My home V700 mostly is for transmission scans of 35mm colour slides and negatives.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Jan 2011 20:29:17 GMT
David Martin says:
Hi Keith, I have just bought the v700 as a result of reading your review. I have never used a film scanner before and hardly used photoshop so you could say I know absolutely nothing about digital manipulation software. I am starting from the very beginning. I use a Leica M3 35 mm Camera and a Bronica 645 120mm camera and shoot B&W all the time. my question is.... Before I buy photoshop CS software, My v700 came with Photoshop Elements 7, is this good enough or do I need to buy the Photoshop CS Software as you advise in your review. I do use an apple Mac and a writing tablet....Oh and can you recommend a tutor for digital photography manipulation. I will still use my darkroom though. Hope to her from you soon.
Best regards and happy new year.....David.

In reply to an earlier post on 17 Jan 2011 21:56:29 GMT
Last edited by the author on 9 Apr 2011 12:29:59 BDT
Charlie-CJ says:
I must admit I'm self taught with digital imaging [I been manipulating scientific digital images since the late 1970s when few others in the world were doing it]. Photoshop Elements 7 will be perfectly adequate for just about everything you will need to do - it's not the latest version, but Photoshop Elements 9 only adds in a few more [admittedly useful] tools, as most of the tools in Elements 9 will be the same as in Elements 7. Years ago I've bought a few books on Photoshop CS [my main image editor] but never opened them, you get a lot further just using the manual [pdf], the in program help and adobe's on-line videos [although being FLASH based the videos may be invisible to your Apple OS]. That said you might find a book or perhaps video DVD useful for a basic grounding and they don't cost much - but you get as much for free on the web [Adobe Elements offers a 'plus' subscription for more on-line help - which used to be free].

There's also plenty of internet help so try internet searching 'scanning film' and various image editing commands [tool names] to find help guides for Photoshop/Elements on other sites [like PC stuff there's tons of Photography sites on-line]. Don't bother with the likes of purchasing/upgrading the Silverfast scanner software, the default Epson Scanner software is pretty good. Use the scanner film holders, they hold the film in focus.

I use a PC, and my Wacom graphics pad is Photoshop friendly, but mostly I find the mouse fine, as you can zoom in, and a lot of object detail selection is semi-automatic.

Without doubt Photoshop CS5 Extended is far superior to Photoshop Elements 9, but being so complex it is a lot harder to get to grips with. Elements is far more consumer friendly and has guided help for edits, red eye removal, etc.., and once you have fully mastered Elements you would find Photoshop CS5 easier as it shares the same tools [albeit in simpler form, and annoyingly it puts the same tools in different menu locations, making it hard to find them]. So stick to Elements 7 and perhaps upgrade later to Elements 9 in 6 months or so if you think the new features are of interest [see the reviews, incl. mine, for features]. Edit with the main editor [not quick edit] and checkout 'layers', 'Tranform's and 'Photomerge' panaramas when more confident [layer masks are only available in Elements 9].

I'd avoid Photoshop CS5 purchase for the time being until you find Elements 7/9 too limited - possibly never given CS5's prices. CS5 adds in things like colour control for accurate commercial printing, but home users get by with `adjust to taste' [digital cameras have Cool/Vivid/Abnormal colour settings anyway, and image quality is much about the cameras onboard digital processing as the lens and CCD]. Elements also has the shadow/highlight tool for shadow detail. Both CS5 and Elements capture via the scanner twain interface in the same manner. When scanning film try switching off the Epson sharpen and other features - these are often better applied with more control via Photoshop Elements/CS. Hardware based Digital Ice scratch removal is another matter, Photoshop can't compete wth that, although this can soften images so only use it when you need to.

By the way I never use the 'photo organizer' half of Elements/Photoshop, only the main image editor, and so stick to logical folder names instead [e.g. date and place] as I find that's far quicker to find and load an image. Also many report crashes with Apple OS and Elements 9 [not 7] so watch out for that if tempted to upgrade [Adobe free patches (updates) will hopefully correct this soon].

Check out my reviews on Elements 9 and Photoshop CS5 as they have more chat about imaging and help in the comments section - and if you have a schoolchild/student about they can buy Photoshop CS5 Extended for around £150 for `their' PC, saving £800 [educational licences] or possibly Adobe Light Room 3 if you don't want to hang around when image editing.

Note: I'd get a digital SLR if you haven't got one - scanning film loses detail over the original film just as the film lost detail capturing the view [as it goes through a set of optics for the second time]. Plus a digital SLR can knock out 12,000 digital hi-res photos a year for next to nothing. Digital cameras and Photoshop are happy with B&W as well [although Photoshop probably does dream in colour]. For your old film archive this scanner is perfect.

Hope this helps

Live long and prosper
[Vulcan for Happy New Year]

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Jan 2011 00:44:25 GMT
David Martin says:
Thanks, great help. A fellow star treker, eh. Thanks again, I'll get back with other Q's later if you don't mind. Regards Dave,

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Mar 2011 23:24:57 GMT
Last edited by the author on 24 Mar 2011 23:25:16 GMT
Marv says:
Hi Keith, I'm in the process of re-packing and sending back my second V700. When scanning medium-format negatives, I'm finding the V700 produces images with streaking down one side, a kind of parallel banding aberration that's particularly visible if there's a lot of sky in shot, something much of my photography has. I've been reading up on a few photography forums about this and it seems to be something that's cropped up for quite a few buyers of the V700. (One guy got to his third V700 before he found one that delivered clean scans.) Have you ever encountered this problem? It seems like a quality scanner otherwise - in terms of speed, detail, value for money. Just wondering whether or not I should try again and order another V700. Particularly disillusioned considering the two scanners so far were from two different companies. Any suggestions much appreciated, Marv.

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Mar 2011 09:49:00 GMT
Last edited by the author on 30 Jan 2013 23:57:35 GMT
Charlie-CJ says:
Hi Marv, sorry to hear of your problems. I may not be of too much help I'm afraid as I don't think the odd misstrack wobble we have seen occasionally is your specifc banding [or is it smearing?] problem, but if the streaking/blurring problem persists it may not be the scanner but something like the large format film properties - our ultrafine grain size B&W TEM film we regularly scan is rather niche at 9000+ dpi and nothing at all like normal 1/4 plate B&W camera film.

You can easily get weird optical effects under an optical microscope from apparently normal samples, where the transmission light scatters and diffracts off unseen submicron particles. Thus the smearing could be an artifact of the B&W film grain size and the location on the platen - old 2700 dpi scanners used to have serious artifacts when scanning which were often called film grain 'aliasing effects' [see]. If you don't see the same banding in colour slide film, which will have different film grain properties, at the same location, this suggests 'aliasing' [i.e. light noise] might well be the problem with your B&W film. If this is the case it will never go away - and if it keeps happening with replacement V700 scanners I suppose it seems unlikely its a scanner fault as such, just the way the scanner interacts with that film's grain type. On the large format B&W film photos I shot in the 1970s as teenager [Kodak 120 B&W roll films via my s/h 1950s Agfa Isolette] my scans have all been fine, excellent even, with the V700. I do get the occassional large & horrible 'bloom' effects around say people when scanning old cheap colour negatives, which seem to be in dark areas of the photo and can be really exaggerated by post scan processing in photoshop. As its probably on the original film, I can't remove it.

Otherwise does the streaking always occur in the same place in the film no matter where the film is on the platen, and do you see it with 35mm colour film in the same platen location? There is also vibration [that should affect anywhere on the film, although one part of the scanner might be more sensitive. Possibly the V700/V750 scan mechanics are prone to this problem if something is slightly out during manufacture if others report similar. Try scanning at lower resolution, say 3,200 for 35mm [you don't really get much better scanning at maximum resolution]. I see on-line some others are saying much the same thing, wonder if its the same film type. Perhaps try and get one of the films scanned at a professional reprographics studio using a Hasselblad scanner. People talk of a scanner having sweet spot [platen area for best scans], perhaps some V700s have a sour spot as well. To minimise post scan software processing artifacts, I generally scan with everything in Epson Twain switched off [sharpen, etc and Digital ICE unless necessary] and do all image processing [except hardware based Digital ICE] in Photoshop. Digital ICE dust/scratch removal is known to produce smearing effects at high zoom, so only use it if your film needs it - owing to this I tend to leave it off, live with minor dust and manually edit the odd splodge over say a face.

We typically scan our large format B&W TEM film at a maximum of 1,200 dpi, only going higher for enlargements of small areas. Although these V700/V750 scanners seem expensive for home use, they are very low budget for the scan detail they can achieve, the likes of NASA will happily spend £20,000 to £50,000 for a film drum scanning system [as their photo archive is precious - see for their film scanning attempts].

Trouble is there's not many consumer large film format competitor's to the V700, other the V750 [which has improved scanhead optics rather than scanning mechanism]. Film scanning is now a very niche activity in these days of digital cameras, as you only scan your film archive once. I don't know much about Microtek's [they seem to have lost the plot recently] or Canon's latest scanners - my trusty 4,800 dpi Canon 9950F isn't anywhere near as flexible as the V700 for film formats above 35mm in size, and has poorer resolution [on paper], but it does seem more soldily engineered. However the Canon ScanGear scanner control software is pants compared to Epson's Scan software [it can't scan to A4 film and is restricted to the film holders provided].

More related scanner stuff:

I used my V700 for scanning ultrafine grain size B&W Kodak 4489 Transmission Electron Microscope film [from work] where the film format size is 3.25" x 4" - I only have two B&W large format family negatives from the 1930s and a single role I shot off on an ancient Agfa bellows camera for fun as a teenager, all the rest are 35mm colour film [mine and my dads - hi-res colour 35mm slides up to the 1980s and then we made the mistake of going to cheap high ASA colour 'free' film that has zilch resolution in comparison to the Agfa 35mm colour slides I used previously - the wives liked photos you could hold], and I've finnished scanning those mostly.

I didn't notice any major repetative streaking on the scans, although it is important to use the negative holders and to have the negative completely flat. The holders hold the film above the glass platen surface at the focus point of the optics, so laying the film slightly curled up on the glass won't produce as good results [fine for a working copy though]. Our TEM negative film didn't quite fit the holders so our workshop made a holder for them, based on advice from a microscope forum [these holders are at my old workplace now]. Prior to that I made a cardboard support frame of about the right height, put it under the negative and laid a glass sheet on top of the negative to flatten it [the glass had very smooth edges, and I was paranoid of scratching the glass platen with it]. If you scan something very flat, like a microscope glass slide with a stained section on it, you can slowly move it up from flat on the glass to further away [using paper/card to raise the slide and prevent scratching the platen], and you can see the scanned image gets better and then worse as it goes through the fixed focus point of the scanning optics. More expensive slide scanners [i.e. Nikon, Hasselbad] can focus the optics onto the film, this V700 can't].

Since then our electron microscopes have gone to digital cameras and we stopped regularly scanning B&W TEM negatives a few years ago. Ironically the projected storage lifetime of the Kodak 4489 B&W silver grain based film, made from a polyester support rather than nitrate, is 500 years and it's resolution far excedes the digital camera that replaced it, so in many respects the new digital camera is inferior - and it's most unlikely computer files will last 100 years unless very carefully archived - if the file survives, the device to read them probably wont. CD-Rs have a projected archive life of 5 to 10 years, video tape perhaps 10 to 20 years (ironically my archive of Hi8/Video8 video tapes are perfect but my only two Camcorders that could play them have packed in). But then most of our film based photographic heritage is in the bin now anyway. The best archive is probably just to keep the original film, I have had ten or twenty digital photos corrupt over the years.

I do place my home scanner on a 1/2" marble slab resting on 1" solid rubber super bouncy kids balls cut in half to minimise vibrational feedback, dome shaped, thin bit upwards [my PC sits on the dome shaped half balls as well, as hard drives aren't vibration friendly]. The marble slab cost a few pounds from Sainsbury's, it's a black marble chopping board the same size as the scanner footprint. I have noticed the old squiggle on large format negatives where the tracking appears to have jumped, but thats only at greater than 100% enlargement, and standard enlargement it looks fine [up to A4/A3]. These misstrackings aren't always in the same place though [no bands, etc.]. As our TEM film isn't of our kids faces or boats with lettering on it's more difficult to judge how well the scanned image has done. At present our V750 scanner scans the odd 35mm film slide, but is used mostly now for simple reflective work [as we have scanned all the film slides/negatives we needed to].

I don't expect too much at ultra high mag, and view the full scans at A4 [maximum A3], a reasonable blow up for any film, including 35mm colour slides. A4 enlargement from 35mm negatives is probably too much for cheap 400 ASA colour negatives from the 1990s 'free film' companies - these films were designed for cheap consumer cameras and typical blow up to 7x5" [A4 max] prints. The danger with PCs is that a few clicks and you can magnify a scan so much it looks fuzzy and horrible. We lost a lot of the original view when first capturing it on 4,000 dpi resolution 35mm slide film via camera optics, and we lose this all again when rescanning the film back through another set of optics. Thats why we need 6,000+ dpi, greater resolution than the original film itself in most cases [and also why a new dSLR produces far superior digital photos to digital scans of 35mm colour slide film]. There is always some evidence of scanning degradation with all scanned images, as a fraction more detail can always been seen in the original slide film when viewing it using a light box and 8x magnifier [those little single eye cup things a jeweller uses].

Posted on 30 Nov 2011 20:30:43 GMT
Last edited by the author on 30 Nov 2011 20:58:34 GMT
D. Page says:
I am at a loss to know what to do: I recently bought this scanner and immediately noticed that there were a few microscopic white specks of dust, and one totally unacceptable larger white speck of dust/debris, all on the underside of the document table glass, and so inaccessible for wiping off or blowing off with a bulb blower. I ordered a replacement, which was even worse. At present, I have returned this otherwise extremely competent scanner, for a full refund. I would appreciate any comments on whether any owners of the V700 or V750 have this defect also, and whether anyone else has had to order several replacements before finally receiving one that is free of this defect. By ensuring that the scanner lamp is warmed up and glowing when the lid is lifted, any white specks of dust/debris can immediately be seen with relative ease, especially if the document table glass is inspected from various angles while the strong lamp is shining brightly underneath the glass.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Nov 2011 21:41:02 GMT
Last edited by the author on 1 Dec 2011 19:45:26 GMT
Charlie-CJ says:
I have to say year ago our Epson scanner arrived without obvious flecks of dust inside, although dust has built up there over the years - I have never shone a light on the platen before though which makes the dust seem far worse. Shining a lamp on mine as I write there is a ton of dust, but mostly thats on the top - the dust vanishes as I wipe the top and then the dust drops straight back again on top - so I must scan through that top dust anyway [just didn't know it was there until I used a torch]. With the torch the glass also looks 'foggy', probably a special coating on the glass so cleaning it underneath might not be good idea anyway in case the coating gets damaged.

If the dust is outside the focus point more than likely the scanner won't see it anyway as it's too small to affect the incident light beam. It's dust on the negative that will spoil the scan as it's in focus with the film [hence the inclusion of infra-red dust removal hardware]. Probably the dust won't affect the scans - the bottom is the light source side and the scan head optics side - but only dust on the scan head optics itself could be a killer [as it would be in focus], hopefully out of focus dust isn't a problem as the depth of focus on the scanner is miniscule covering just the point where the film is - thats why you need film supports as the scan head is rigidly fixed focus. If you increase the focus depth of field on a microscope the image becomes intolerable [all the dust on the optics is visible], but set the microscope up correctly with a narrow depth of field and the dust on the optics vanishes from view. Should be the same for scanners.

Did the film scans look OK? - perhaps try transmission [film] scanning a clear area of glass and see if it's a problem. Doing it myself I do see a fair bit of dust as white specks [negative mode], I guess the busy film image just hides it - and our Canon 9950F film scanner has identical 'dustiness'. However cleaning the platen top with my trusty home made anti-static liquid [50% distilled water/50% propanol] and cotton cloth reduced this to almost zero - so the problem dust was mostly on top of the platen and removable. I'm wary of using liquids with my scanner though in case it creaps inside.

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Dec 2011 09:32:48 GMT
Last edited by the author on 1 Dec 2011 18:51:34 GMT
D. Page says:
Thank you for your very quick and thorough response, Keith. You indicate that with your V700 "there is a ton of dust, but mostly that's on top" - which obviously implies that there is a certain amount of dust stuck to the underside of your V700. I'm also quite alarmed to hear you say that your V700 seems to have accumulated dust on the underside of the glass also. You may well know more about this than I, but how is it the case that there are specks of dust inside the scanner in the first place? Do they just rub off the mechanism over time? Do Epson assemble these scanners in less than completely dust-free environments? I don't understand how there can be any dust inside these scanners to begin with. Maybe you could enlighten me, Keith. Incidentally, our bottom-of-the-range Brother DCP-115C printer/scanner/copier does not have a single speck of dust anywhere on the underside of its glass.
I'm saying everything regarding my V700 in the past tense, Keith, because, as I say, I have returned both V700s I recently had for a full refund at present (I didn't even use the replacement, as it was even worse than the one I first had, and used, and I immediately decided to send it back for a full refund). Film scans looked OK, but only because I avoided the exact area of the glass which the larger white dust speck resided. My 35mm film is all cut into strips of 4 film frames, so I was able to move the strip's position so that the speck of dust was in between 2 adjacent frames of film. When scanning photographs/documents using the reflective scanning method, then this larger speck of dust was unavoidable and to remove it, I had to use Photoshop's clone stamp tool. I'm not saying that I was not able to remedy the speck of dust appearing in my scans, but I don't see why I should have to do this with a brand new scanner supposedly designed for very serious enthusiasts (and in the case of the V750, used by many professionals).
I have been advised that, because it may possibly be a batch problem, I should just wait a few weeks and then re-order a new V700. I very much would like this scanner but I'm not at all sure that I'm going to get one without any larger specks of white dust which show up in scans. If this turns out to be the case, then I would probably, very reluctantly, just get one and use Photoshop's clone stamp tool to remove the presence of any larger specks of dust/debris from my scans. I am uncomfortable with such a situation, however, as I don't feel that I should expect to have to do this with a brand new scanner. Any further comments would be greatly appreciated.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›

Review Details