After doing an APX 25 BW negative resolution test, in which it fared similar
to the 4870, I tested it with MF colour negatives. The scans were certainly
marginally higher resolution than the 4870 and the images were sharper too.
The size and speed of the F3200, and the possibility of buying a refurb one
at a discount clinched the deal. The F3200 has much better resolution than
the CNET touted Microtek i900, which was ranked above the 4870.

The 4870 was giving the equivalent of a perfect 2800 dpi at best, but could
be worse, depending upon film bow. The F3200 was consistently delivering
2500 dpi. It had less colour fringing and was considerably faster. My
Expression Pro only delivered about 900dpi. In various reviews I have seen
4870's on a par, or slightly worse than a F3200. I think the one I borrowed
was particularly well aligned.

The other thing I like about the F3200 is the f3200 is the ability to scan
6x12 negatives. Also, unlike big flatbeds, there does not seem to be a sweet
spot, so more consistent scans seem to be more likely. In all of this, it is
quite obvious that results vary between similar models, depending upon
manufacturing tolerances.

There is a review of the F3200 on Photo-I, but IMHO it is flawed. The main
comparison is done with mounted slides and then the author admits to there
being a problem later on and demonstrates a significant better resolution
with unmounted slides. I told me in a private email that if he had re-done
the first part of the review it would have been clearly better. However he
was of the opinion that he just tested it as it came to him. Slide mounts
vary in thickness, so it seems that the F3200 has a shallow depth of field.


Regards Chris Woodhouse MEng. ARPS

Darkroom resources and products www.ktphotonics.co.uk




On 25/2/05 5:48 pm, in article ,
"rafe bustin" wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:03:02 +0000, Christopher Woodhouse
wrote:

After a few false starts with 4870's and Microtek i900's I'm using the Epson
F3200. I'm getting excellent quality for 6x6 negatives at 16" square and
would obviously expect even better still with the larger negative. The
scanning software plays a big part. Vuescan does mono best, the Epson seems
to make effortless work of colour negatives and Silverfast seems best for
Slides. Not quite the most minimalist approach!

I worked out for critical resolution I would need 5lp/mm on the print, which
equates to 330dpi ( a lot of integral calculus). The F3200 has an effective
resolution of 2500dpi which is sufficient for MF negs and comfortable for
4x5.

I'm also working on the basis that you don't examine a 20x16 from 12 inches
off your nose. I'm sure I can do better, but unlikely with a consumer
flatbed.

Chris Woodhouse ARPS


Chris, are you saying that the F3200 delivers
more effective detail (or resolution) than the
4870? That would be interesting.

The 4870, in my estimation, is delivering about
half its rated resolution.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com