Hello, can anyone recommend a reasonably priced scanner to use for scanning 4x5 film?

Thanks.

Emil

I use an Epson 4990 Pro flatbed scanner, it handles everything up to 8 x 10 and after learning how to use it to the best of it's ability, it is a great scanner! I bought mine from B&H for just under $500, I can't get onto B&H's website but adorama has it for 549.00, if this is too much they do have the 4990 Photo for $400.00 I don't exactly know what the difference is, but I am sure you can find out at epson's website. Hope this helps!!

Epson has the Perfection 3200 reconditioned at a delivered price of $179. It has a 4x5 holder but I haven't tried it yet.
I have used it for 120 with good result.
Roger

I use the Epson Expression 1600, no longer the latest model (1680, I think), but it wasn't cheap with the FireWire and transparency lid, around $1300 IIRC. However it gives great results in color and b/w with everything from 120 up to 8x10 glass plate negs, incl. 4x5. (For 35 slides a dedicated scanner like the Mnolta Dimage ScanDual IV works better.)

Microtek ScanMaker 8700 Pro in the used market; new version <a href=http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=318953&is=REG&addedTroughType=search> i900 at B&H for $529 </a>, or <a href=http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=264643&is=REG&addedTroughType=search> microtek 1800f at B&H for $900 </a>.

I normally use my Minolta Dimage Scan Multi to accomplish scans of 35mm and 120/220. Until recently, I had my local shop scan my 4x5 negs. Then, just as an experiment, I tried my "cheap" Epson Perfection 1660 Photo scanner and was surprised at the results. I purchased this scanner for a reconditioned price of $45. and have use it only for general purpose and photo scanning. Now, I believe I will use it with more purpose.

My Epson 2450 does ok with 4x5 and appears it will go 20x24 without any sharpness issues but it takes some tweeking. The shadows tend to go magenta so have to be recurved in photoshop and with positives that are too dark it needs a lot of contrast and curve control to dig into the shadows. I have used this scanner with medium format (6x6) and have made good 11x14's but that's the limit. 35mm Fuji Xtra 400 (my favorite 35mm film) scans terrible on this scanner and i can actually get more detail out of a 4x5 scanned print than the scanned negative. Scanned 35mm Kodachrome makes good 8x10's. This scanner is the reason I got back into big cameras by purchasing a Speed Graphic as the scans on the web looked better than an expensive fullframe digital camera. Shots are expensive with this camera but a drop in the bucket compared to what a good 16x20 or larger prints costs.

I once owned an Epson 3200 Photo, I found that the 3200 doing 35mm is far than a nightmare. But, I'd say it would be fine for 4x5, using 2000dpi you get a nice 10000x8000 tif. It's banging cheap on ebay now.

Of course, the higher end side can always go to the Epson 4870 and 4990 if you want good value and quality. I think the new V700/750 would be a little bit too much for 4x5 scanning. I won't have doubt V700/750 doing 35mm and have a clear edge over 4990 or even a strong fight with the Nikon Coolscan 9000. But for 4x5, I am down with 4870/4990, save $200 and spend it on camera accessory or a lens.

Since I make no money on my photography, cheap is the way to go for me.

I had heard good things about the Agfa Duoscan series, particularly the HiD model, but it has a SCSI intertface. It used

I got one on eBay from a seller that was liquidating 5 or 6 from a company $69 + $30 s/h (nearly 40#), and about $15-20 (maybe more with shipping) learning/buying the right SCSI board & cable.

What I like about it is reflective items go on top, like normal, and transparencies go in a separate 'tray', glassless holders for up to 4x5, and a glass tray for up to 8x10.

Optical resolution is 1000x2000.

Software was available on Agfa's site (don't know how long), and there are two popular aftermarket s/w products that both work.

Maintenance may be aother unanswered question in the future...but the 8x10 transparency capability was a nice factor.