print44
Well-known
Often the UK price is the same in pounds as the US price is in dollars - so £2500.
Hardly the medium format equivalent of their 35mm scanners in terms of affordability, which is a real disappointment.
kanzlr
Hexaneur
compared to Coolscan 9000 used prices, it IS affordable.
david.elliott
Well-known
Yeah. I would have to sell quite a fair amount of photography equipment to afford the scanner. It appears as if it will be significantly more expensive than the 35mm counterparts. Oh well. Don't think I'm willing to sell my leica mp to purchase the scanner at that price. I'll likely stick with my v500. I'd been hoping that the price would be more in the $1500 range (which is still much more expensive than the 35mm scanners).
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
The scanner may be a little more expensive than hoped but MF cameras are cheap. For three and a half grand you can still produce an image that will make an M9M flinch with embarrasment!
bwcolor
Veteran
10600 input, 5300 output. AFAIK thats across the board, not depending on film format.
Don't forget it will have a real good lens fitted.
Let's just wait to see what it is and not slag it off prior to that.
I hope it will have some extensive reviews online soon
So tell me, what does it mean to the end result that their is 10600dpi input. What does that mean? I scan for output. Do you scan for input?
Michel154
Established
here is a e-mail i got from plustek regarding the Plustek 120
"Hello ,
I do apologize but our Optic film scanner won't be available in our US office until Mid sep, and as far as the price goes I believe it will be around $300-$500.00."
good price if it is true
"Hello ,
I do apologize but our Optic film scanner won't be available in our US office until Mid sep, and as far as the price goes I believe it will be around $300-$500.00."
good price if it is true
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
True, Keith.
But I want to make the M9M run off with embarrassment by scanning my Rolleiflex Tele and 2.8F negatives with that scanner and I can't have both...
Yet I want to be able to scan my negatives with enough resolution to print to 35x35 inch...
I feel a long time of commissioned scanning coming before I have accumulated enough clam shells to afford the Plustek!
gavinlg
Veteran
I'm going to wait for an official, set price until I make assumptions personally.
david.elliott
Well-known
$2k is very competitive. The 9000 official retail was $2199 (of course, limited availability even when it was still in production meant it sold for a lot more.) I sold 50+ of them in a few months back in 2010, could have sold 250+ if the store knew how to order and had listened to my suggestions...yes I'm speaking of one of the site sponsors here.
bwcolor
Veteran
So, what is the reason to even mention the 10600dpi, other than to mislead the consumer? We scan for output and not input. That number is meaningless and if it isn't Plustek needs to explain why it isn't meaningless. Every consumer that you sell to will scan to obtain output and not input.
I'll approach this another way. I'm guessing that there is some advantage to the 10600dpi sensor resolution. When I say what does this mean.. what is this, I am saying that the number is misleading to the public, unless you also state the value to the final output. In other words, would a 8000dpi input be somehow inferior? Would the scanned output look different? I can understand how a DSLR, or color sensor with a Bayer filter will result in a different Moire appearance given a difference in input resolution, but how does this work with this scanner? I'm attempting to ask you (Plustek) to explain the advantage of this number being high and not just what the number represents.. scanner resolution. If their is a value (a benefit to the output file), please state it in your marketing literature and if not please drop the number from your literature.. it is confusing.
gavinlg
Veteran
If you want to scan at the optical limit scan at the 5300dpi level. There may be an advantage to scanning higher and then downsampling back to a 5300dpi equivalent, as is the case with the Epson flatbeds and the plustek 35mm scanners. They've given you a true optical resolution limit, what more do you want? Epson don't give anything of the sort with their flatbeds, and we know its somewhere around 2000dpi which is much lower than this. If you want to scan higher than the optical limit you can - if you don't want to, don't!
Aristophanes
Well-known
A V750 and Plustek 7600 together can be had new for about $1,200 all in (taxes, delivery + Vuescan if needed) This is a spacious but more versatile system than the Optic 120, and if using Vuescan, all one needs is a single piece of software.
I doubt one would see major resolution or quality differences.
If the Plustek 120 is much more than US$1,200 in price it will have trouble selling. For 120 film it will compete against lots of used Epson 700/750's which are very good at 120 already.
If this thing is technically very good and priced right it can dominate the market. If priced too high, it becomes niche and less relevant to other market possibilities.
I hope that Plustek would market it to scanning and processing companies with an after-market warranty and service plan. That would justify a higher price.
I would gladly consolidate my 2-scanner system, but not at an $800+ premium. Not worth it.
I doubt one would see major resolution or quality differences.
If the Plustek 120 is much more than US$1,200 in price it will have trouble selling. For 120 film it will compete against lots of used Epson 700/750's which are very good at 120 already.
If this thing is technically very good and priced right it can dominate the market. If priced too high, it becomes niche and less relevant to other market possibilities.
I hope that Plustek would market it to scanning and processing companies with an after-market warranty and service plan. That would justify a higher price.
I would gladly consolidate my 2-scanner system, but not at an $800+ premium. Not worth it.
The OpticFilm 120 will have NO problem selling at $2k, based on demand for the 9000 at well over that figure. The resolution and DR will be significantly better for medium format than the Epson flat beds, not to mention the difficulties with aftermarket gadgets for film flatness.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
My current set-up is a twin-scanner one, with a Minolta ScanDual IV and a Microtek ScanMaker 8700. The ScanMaker with VueScan is nice and supports a lot of different formats but currently I only need it for 6x6 Rolleiflex negatives. No 6x7, 6x9 and larger negatives, while even a negative holder for 4x5" is included! Thing is, the ScanMaker only allows for 1200dpi and that's not enough for my current demands.
The Minolta is okay with Snow Leopard, a later-edition version of the software and a customized TWAIN that I've picked up on the internet somewhere but I cannot upgrade to newer versions of OSX. It does not run with VueScan either, it freezes up if I try.
Need the extra resolution and support for future software but it seems I'm in for two new scanners and a whole new set-up to get that.
Let's see what September brings, price- and possibly discount wise.
The Minolta is okay with Snow Leopard, a later-edition version of the software and a customized TWAIN that I've picked up on the internet somewhere but I cannot upgrade to newer versions of OSX. It does not run with VueScan either, it freezes up if I try.
Need the extra resolution and support for future software but it seems I'm in for two new scanners and a whole new set-up to get that.
Let's see what September brings, price- and possibly discount wise.
redisburning
Well-known
you seem extremely butthurt over the company offering you the dpi the scanner can scan at and then saving you the trouble of having to test it yourself by providing a number from a reliable tester that represents what you're actually getting.
way to look a gift horse in the mouth, sheesh.
bwcolor
Veteran
I would like more clarity in their representation. I would like the same for other companies that market scanners. I'm fine with quoting input numbers if Plustek tells me why this is important, otherwise it is just marketing hype. As mentioned before, there is no standard within the industry when presenting specifications, so at a minimum, let's not confuse the consumer. Clearly, this will be a quality scanner. I purchased a Plustek film scanner for one-off scans even though I have a 9000ED and V-750Pro. I think that it is great that they are supporting film. I just want more clarity to help the consumer to make a buying decision. BTW.. tell me how scanning above optical resolution works. Does interpolation actually yield better results? I don't know..never did it. I remember the Internet searches that I went through trying to figure out the true optical resolution of my Epson V-750Pro. There are serious questions about Epson's representations. I think that this is why this is a hot topic for me. I should not have needed to research such a thing. I applaud Plustek for actually testing resolution via a standardized method.
gavinlg
Veteran
Its just that the optical lens can't resolve much more than that 5300 optical limit. The sensor can get more information though - 10000 whatever it is, so you can scan at that and then down-sample and hopefully gain some false detail (which is kind of like real detail, but not really).
This is my meagre understanding of it. The optical dpi is really high already though - I don't think you'd ever need to go over it.
Jamie123
Veteran
Not really. They're decent but not 'very good'. I have an Epson which I still use for 4x5 and even for that it's just ok. I generally don't bother spotting my scans as I know I'll have to rescan them on a Flextight or drum scanner if I want to use them. And the Epsons do an incredibly poor job with slides as the light source is not adjustable.
As has been mentioned before, even if it was $3000 it would sell very well, provided it really is equal or better than the Nikon. The medium format film market is a niche and they can 'dominate' that market simply by being the only ones who offer such a product.
KM-25
Well-known
Agreed, there is a healthy market for this since the 9000 was discontinued.