Opinions on the PrimeFilm XA Plus by Pacific Image

[Aqualung]

What do you guys think of the PrimeFilm XA Plus by Pacific Image? I need to scan a lot of old uncut 35mm film negatives. I am a Linux user, and I just purchased a forever VueScan license. Does anyone have knowledge of a better (and hopefully cheaper) scanner candidate for this task? The PacificImage is, indeed, quite pricey, and wife won't be happy.

 

[armadsen]

I don't have firsthand experience with the PrimeFilm XA but my impression of it based on what I've heard others say over the years is that it's not that good. I have a Nikon Coolscan 5000ED with the film strip loader modified for full rolls and it does a great job. They're significantly more expensive (used) than that PrimeFilm XA, though.

You might also consider a camera scanning setup. I have a Plustek 8200i, an Epson V850 flatbed, the Coolscan, and a (Negative Supply) camera scanning setup, and I pretty much only use the camera scanning setup for 35mm nowadays. It's so, so much faster to scan a roll with it than any of the other three options, I have full control over focus and exposure, and the quality is plenty good enough for me.

 

[agentlossing]

I have the XAs, which was the previous model to the XA Plus... I'm not sure what's different. Most of the specs seem the same. I did see that the Plus model can save to DNG, which is certainly more convenient than having to save as TIFF with the XAs.

It's an okay scanner, I wouldn't say that there are ANY "great" scanners out there in the consumer space. I get good enough scans, for sure. Certainly better than any flatbed for 35mm. But there are annoyances: fairly slow scan speed at higher resolutions, an upper limit to resolution that's well below the 10,000 DPI that they advertise, loud operation, and pretty poor frame selection. I always have to adjust frames before scanning, which is very time consuming.

Personally if I had to do it over, I'd just spend $209 current Amazon price to get the PrimeFilm 7250 Plus, which doesn't have a motorized feed (but since the automatic frame selection is so bad anyway...), doesn't come with software (but you have Vuescan), and is lower nominal resolution. See if it gives you good enough scans and send it back if it doesn't. You'll feel less ripped off than if you spend the big bucks on the XA Plus.

 

[Aqualung]

fairly slow scan speed at higher resolutions

For what it's worth, they claim that the XA Plus is 1.7 times faster than the old XAs.

 

[FIegiso]

I have a Reflecta RPS 10M film scanner which seems to be the European version of the Prime Film XA. I have been using it for about a year scanning primarily black and white. There was a steep initial learning curve getting to the point were scanning was just another operation in my workflow.

One thing I have learned is that the Reflecta (and probably all scanners) performance is highly dependent on the software you use to drive it. I have SilverFast Ai, CyberViewX (the OEM software), and a trial version of VueScan. On well exposed negatives they all work pretty good. It is when there is a challenging exposure (you screwed up) that the software starts to matter. Even on the seemly simple matter of detecting frames, the performance differs between software packages. Generally SilverFastAi has had no issue finding frames, however, I have seen CyberViewX completely loose it on the same roll.

To answer your question, I don't think there is a better option at the resolution with automated film handling that can be purchased new.

Anyway, I have been posting on my website regarding my experiences with scanning. Maybe you will find it helpful.

 

[valdas]

I have a Reflecta RPS 10M film scanner which seems to be the European version of the Prime Film XA. I have been using it for about a year scanning primarily black and white. There was a steep initial learning curve getting to the point were scanning was just another operation in my workflow.

One thing I have learned is that the Reflecta (and probably all scanners) performance is highly dependent on the software you use to drive it. I have SilverFast Ai, CyberViewX (the OEM software), and a trial version of VueScan. On well exposed negatives they all work pretty good. It is when there is a challenging exposure (you screwed up) that the software starts to matter. Even on the seemly simple matter of detecting frames, the performance differs between software packages. Generally SilverFastAi has had no issue finding frames, however, I have seen CyberViewX completely loose it on the same roll.

To answer your question, I don't think there is a better option at the resolution with automated film handling that can be purchased new.

Anyway, I have been posting on my website regarding my experiences with scanning. Maybe you will find it helpful.

Some years ago I also used this Reflecta model (and sold it). I agree it was OKish for b&w, but for color and especially slide film it was quite inferior to Coolscan (when I did a very simple side by side comparison).

 

[FIegiso]

Some years ago I also used this Reflecta model (and sold it). I agree it was OKish for b&w, but for color and especially slide film it was quite inferior to Coolscan (when I did a very simple side by side comparison).

Help me here because I think the Reflecta is much better than okayish on black and white.

The Nikons were benchmarks in their day so no great surprise that they were better.

Color, slides? No idea, don't shot either.

 

[valdas]

Help me here because I think the Reflecta is much better than okayish on black and white.

The Nikons were benchmarks in their day so no great surprise that they were better.

Color, slides? No idea, don't shot either.

well, it's semantics. Maybe OK'ish is an oversimplification. I think dynamic range was not perfect compared to Coolscan, at least that's how I remember (especially with shots that were not well exposed). I had no complaints regarding the resolution.

 

[agentlossing]

For what it's worth, they claim that the XA Plus is 1.7 times faster than the old XAs.

One thing I have learned is that the Reflecta (and probably all scanners) performance is highly dependent on the software you use to drive it.

It's true that when I switched from Silverfast 8 to 9, scanning got quicker. Which is strange; you'd think only scanning quality might be affected, but speed was as well.

Framing is still quite bad. A good bit of the time it takes to scan is made up of selecting the proper framing so I don't have to do a lot of cropping afterwards.

 

[oldwino]

I've been using the XA "special Edition" (whatever that means) for several years now. It has been a pretty reliable machine. I use it with Vuescan. The pluses are that it can scan entire rolls, rarely misses frames, and gives decent quality (given its price point).
The negatives (sorry for the pun) are that it is slow (I scan mostly at 3200dpi, which gives the best quality to speed ratio), and it is slow...I usually end up doing something else around the house while it runs.
I scan as RAW DNGs and convert to positives in another editing program.

 

[Wenge]

I tossed my Primefilm 120 and same thing with Primefilm XE about to happen because of slowness. It's an older scanner from ~2014. I've been getting better results from a hi-res camera my Sony A7r5, and the Sony 90/2.8 macro lens. The newer Primefilm scanners appear to be very good, but have no experience with them. I didn't realize they had a newer version the XA Plus, and it looks like there's also a newer XE Plus that's cheaper than XA Plus and likely alot better than my earlier XE version. (I thought I had the XA but mistook the lettering on the unit.)

 

[Aqualung]

Thanks for all the replies! Say I go the camera route: is there a full camera setup comparable in price with the price of the Primefilm XA Plus ($550)? I currently have no digital camera. Or is it that putting together an acceptable camera setup will run me much more?

 

[Wenge]

A digital camera & lens that does it will cost more, and for 35mm film the new XA Plus looks like has similar good ppi image quality to the older Primefilm XE but faster. It takes ~5 minutes to scan one image on the old unit at 5400ppi but it's predictable using Vuescan, and easier to use than the learning curve needed with a camera setup. You can find the older Primefilm units I think still but the slowness is frustrating and maybe worth getting the newer one if a lot of images need scanning.

edit: am keeping Primefilm XE after a few slide scans earlier to test it again..glad i did, using Vuescan is so much easier latest updates than before. It's easier to load several slides in the feeder, only one handling of the slide or film, then just move the plastic film-holder in the scanner, vs centering each one with the camera, light table issues, focus, etc. it also picks up all the depth of field in one scan vs a macro lens requiring f/8+ w/o focus-brackets. Why keeping it. (for 120, the camera setup still wins all day).

 

[FIegiso]

It's true that when I switched from Silverfast 8 to 9, scanning got quicker. Which is strange; you'd think only scanning quality might be affected, but speed was as well.

Framing is still quite bad. A good bit of the time it takes to scan is made up of selecting the proper framing so I don't have to do a lot of cropping afterwards.

Are you cropping at the scan stage of your workflow?

Normally I do a pre-scan on the first frame, set frame and scan the entire roll full frame. I do cropping later in Lr.

 

[shawn]

Thanks for all the replies! Say I go the camera route: is there a full camera setup comparable in price with the price of the Primefilm XA Plus ($550)? I currently have no digital camera. Or is it that putting together an acceptable camera setup will run me much more?

I think you could do it with a camera for around that price, esp. if you are getting the camera just for scanning and aren't worrying about the latest tech.

Get some form of mirrorless camera, and if you currently have a macro lens an adapter for that lens. Otherwise get an inexpensive MF macro lens and the appropriate lens adapter and you have the hardware you need besides a light table. You will also need software to invert the negatives back to positives. You can do that in Vuescan I believe. I use Negative Lab Pro in Lightroom to do this. You *might* even be able to do it in camera for cameras that have an 'invert color' filter option in them. Pentax's have that for example. A Pentax K01 mirrorless is about $200 which leaves plenty for a lens adapter and a macro lens.

 

[Aqualung]

Here's a nice review of the predecessor (namely PrimeFilm XAs).

 

[Radost]

Some years ago I also used this Reflecta model (and sold it). I agree it was OKish for b&w, but for color and especially slide film it was quite inferior to Coolscan (when I did a very simple side by side comparison).

You need to calibrate the color for slides. Works perfect after that.

 

[MeredithStoneleigh]

I have a Reflecta RPS 10M film scanner which seems to be the European version of the Prime Film XA. I have been using it for about a year scanning primarily black and white. There was a steep initial learning curve getting to the point were scanning was just another operation in my workflow.

One thing I have learned is that the Reflecta (and probably all scanners) performance is highly dependent on the software you use to drive it. I have SilverFast Ai, CyberViewX (the OEM software), and a trial version of VueScan. On well exposed negatives they all work pretty good. It is when there is a challenging exposure (you screwed up) that the software starts to matter. Even on the seemly simple matter of detecting frames, the performance differs between software packages. Generally SilverFastAi has had no issue finding frames, however, I have seen CyberViewX completely loose it on the same roll.

To answer your question, I don't think there is a better option at the resolution with automated film handling that can be purchased new.

Anyway, I have been posting on my website regarding my experiences with scanning. Maybe you will find it helpful.

Thanks for explaining, and also thanks your site link. I will keep checking it.

 

[Radost]

Long time PIE XA Special edition user here. I did a test with pulstek at the same time I purchased the XA. The autofocus made a huge difference…
Scanning yourself is a big plus and the quality compared to Frontier is similar when using silverFast.
THE AUTOFOCUS IS A MUST!!! Just today I updated silverFast and somehow the auto focus was disabled. The quality was still good but the grain was out of focus a little.
About auto frame: IT WORKS with most films. Some films that are not flat “KODAK 5222” will fail in the beginning. It only makes a difference at the very end of the frames very little.
You have to elevate the scanner and let the film drop freely on the way out and have a something slippery on the way in.
When it comes to color negatives you have to experiment a lot. With positives there is a color calibration. Works great.
Dmax is very good. Black and white does not need that much anyways.
I have scaned 100s of films “saved a lot of money and the sharpness and dynamic range have been great. I rescanned some old noritsu and frontier negatives and the PIE was a lot sharper on the grain.

P.S. I scan on the PIE 120 as well. Works great but no autofocus.