Plustek 7400 vs 7600i vs Minolta DS IV vs 5400 elite

E

edftwin

Street Wanderer
Local time
6:07 PM
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
123
Hi, i have an opportunity to buy a dedicated 35mm film scanner but i'm having hard time to make up my mind. I have done tonnes of research and finally narrowed down my choices which fit my budget just nice but i would like to do a final run through you guys who have much more experience than me.

I don't really care about DICE as i can fix the dust myself. What is important is the scan speed, image quality, sharpness, dmax, contrast and colour.

I have read that the scans from plustek have more noise in the shadow and dmax is lower than what dual scan IV and 5400 elite can give. I'm not too sure if that is true or not.

The downside of minolta is the lack of support from manufacture since they quit making it years ago, so once the scanner goes wrong, i'll have to replace with another one.

I would be glad if anyone could provide a few sample of photos from these scanners for a comparison.


Here is the list of scanners that i pick:
Plustek 7400
Plustek 7600i SE
Minolta DS IV
Minolta 5400 elite
 
Last edited:
SD IV:

20110619-35rolleiretro100-1324-1.jpg


20110603-35schlecker200-1237.jpg


20110514-35rolleiretro100-2-1069-web.jpg


Runs fine on Mac OSX up 'till Snow Leopard, once you have found the correct drive (which does not seem to differ from an incorrect driver, but the one did work and the other did crash), but will not work with Vuescan for a strange reason. Freezes up the software.

Might be only mine has that issue?
 
Nice photos ! Thanks for showing it !

Would you reckon Minolta instead of Plustek?


buzzardkid said:
SD IV:

20110619-35rolleiretro100-1324-1.jpg


20110603-35schlecker200-1237.jpg


20110514-35rolleiretro100-2-1069-web.jpg


Runs fine on Mac OSX up 'till Snow Leopard, once you have found the correct drive (which does not seem to differ from an incorrect driver, but the one did work and the other did crash), but will not work with Vuescan for a strange reason. Freezes up the software.

Might be only mine has that issue?
Click to expand...
 
Is there any other real difference in the hardware between Plustek 7400 and 7600 models aside from the IR lamp being available in 7600? I have the 7500 model that has the IR channel and yes it does save some time in PP removing dust and other particles from dirty negs, but its not perfect. Also as it doesn't work with traditional B&W film (c41 process only) then I rarely get to use it.

If I was in the market for a dedicated 135 scanner and someone offered me the 7400 at a cheap price I'd buy it in a flash.

95% of stuff in my flickr stream (link below) is scanned with the 7500 model (photos from the last year or so), one example here:


5222 bench by randomm, on Flickr
 
randomm said:
Is there any other real difference in the hardware between Plustek 7400 and 7600 models aside from the IR lamp being available in 7600? I have the 7500 model that has the IR channel and yes it does save some time in PP removing dust and other particles from dirty negs, but its not perfect. Also as it doesn't work with traditional B&W film (c41 process only) then I rarely get to use it.
Click to expand...

Mark from Plustek here!

The OpticFilm 7400 and 7600i SE are pretty similar. The only difference being the 7400 doesn't have the IR channel for dust and scratch removal. The OpticFilm 7600i Ai uses a different version of Silverfast (Ai Studio) and has IT8 calibration and CMYK softproofing.

As you mention, IR dust and scratch removal does not work with silver halide based film.

Believe it or not, I actually own a Minolta DualScan IV. I had it before I started working at Plustek. Personally I think that once you get the hang of using SilverFast, you can get better images out of the Plustek than you can the Minolta.

Regarding shadow detail, the Minolta isn't that great. I think that the Multi Exposure feature of the OpticFilm 7X00 and SilverFast will give you better shadow detail than the Minolta.

So I have my choice of using either scanner, and I haven't used the Minolta in over a year! n Its not a bad scanner, I just think the Plustek can give me better images.

Mark
 
I don't really care about DICE as i can fix the dust myself.
Click to expand...

While that may be the case, if you have the chance to get the 5400, get it. It's just as good as the Nikon Coolscan 9000, but of course, for 35mm; finding the drivers is just as complicated for new OSes
 
mdruziak said:
Mark from Plustek here!
Personally I think that once you get the hang of using SilverFast, you can get better images out of the Plustek than you can the Minolta.
Mark
Click to expand...

I think we would appreciate your workflow and settings to get the best out the Silverfast/Plustek combination. Would you be willing to share ?
 
I haven't used the others, but I love the Minolta-Dimage 5400. It turns out gorgeous Super B (approximately 13x19 inch) scans that I've had printed as wide as 48 inches.

After you've spotted a few files, you won't be so quick to diss Digital Ice. It is an amazing software.
 
I think each scanner has it's own characteristics as to how it renders film. I know the Minoltas tend to emphasize the grain in B&W more than the Nikons.

The nice thing about the Plusteks seems to be that they are new and backed by a viable business, and they have a simpler push-pull film advance. The weak spot for many of the other film scanners is the film strip advance. I probably should have tried them but I do like the auto-advance, even if it can be problematic, it is nice to scan six frames at one go for proofing.

I really like the way the Minolta Dual-Scan IV renders sharp grain. It is tedious to retouch but it works and gets the job done. I've used the Nikons as well and prefer the lowly, inexpensive Dual Scan IV, even if it doesn't have the best specifications. If I was only looking absolute quality then I wouldn't shoot 35mm film at all, or I'd get a drum scan. Instead I am looking for a "look" which liberates me from chasing the ultimate.

The Minolta build quality is not that great, so this time around I bought two in order to have a back up.

VueScan is the way to go, it makes the crappy OEM software irrelevant - I don't even install it.
 
Thank you guys for all your response.

I'm leaning towards Plustek since they are still making it so i will have no worries about warranty issue.

May i know what is the improvement in 7600i over 7500i?

Thanks.
 
edftwin said:
Thank you guys for all your response.

I'm leaning towards Plustek since they are still making it so i will have no worries about warranty issue.

May i know what is the improvement in 7600i over 7500i?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

The 7600i has LED based illumination, the 7500i has a cold cathode bulb. Basically there is no warm up time with the 7600i and the illumination system is more reliable and stable.

Mark
 
I use a 7300 with V6x Silverfast Plus SE software, I have always liked the results I get... I will upgrade to the V8x Silverfast Plus SE in a month or 2...

Fuji Neopan 400 scanned at 5000dpi for files about 90mb large in a TIFF format... I also do 2 or 4 scans per negative...I do not use the dust/scratch remover... destroys too much very fine detail.

Not much difference between the 7300 and 7400 as far the way it scans

p303259181-5.jpg


p133846618-4.jpg


p692625315-4.jpg


p931965604-4.jpg
 
mdruziak said:
The 7600i has LED based illumination, the 7500i has a cold cathode bulb. Basically there is no warm up time with the 7600i and the illumination system is more reliable and stable.

Mark
Click to expand...

What about in term of performance and scan quality?
 
Is it true that one must scan at 7200dpi and downsize to 3500dpi to get the actual 3500dpi quality? And also the multi sampling, multi exposure and scratch and dust removal are not that effective for 7500i or the new software has it corrected? I read these from an internet review but i need more clarification.

Thanks.

@DNG, nice and sharp pictures ! The tones seem good ! Did you tweak anything in photoshop or there are direct from scan?
 
Well, I have heard the dpi numbers may not not be as high as advertized... BUT, I tried all different settings and found that around 5000dpi, the scan can pick up the grain sharpness quite good, above that, it just adds about double to triple the scan time with marginal results. My scans at 5000dpi with 4 multi-scans are about 5min. And at 2 scans, about 3min.. the added scans help on larger grained negatives to smooth out the more solid areas.

edftwin
I adj Contrast a bit, and added sharpening after the scan... I try to scan a tad soft in contrast, and adjust later... I do adj the Histogram and some curves with the scan software... but no sharpening or dust adj's.. I use a film cleaner and pressurized air to clean up the negs before I scan.
In the editing software (ACDSee Pro 3), I will tweak a bit more and sharpen, and use the "Lighting" sliders (9 of them), to adj specific areas of the gray scale. I like the "Lighting Sliders" over using curves.
 
Last edited:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom