Can you share any observations on how this scanner compares to current Epson/Canon flatbeds. I'm searching through local design studios for an older scanner that they no longer use. Something like Umax PowerLook 3000, III (Heidelberg Linoscan 1800, 1400), Agfa DuoScan T1200, T2500, HiD etc. type of scanner. I know I would need to get a dedicated ancient PC/Mac to run the scanner but if the quality is OK and the price is right...
Hello, we're off topic on this, so please let's start a new topic if you want to further talk about that; for now I'll write just some basic infos.
🙂
The Heidelberg Saphir HiRes and the Umax Powerlook 3000 are related.
Umax manifactured the Saphir HiRes for Heidelberg; when Heidelberg discontinued the scanner, Umax started selling an updated version under its own brand: that's the Powerlook 3000.
They have the same nominal specs: 1220x3048 ppi for the whole scanning bed and 3048x3048 for a central portion of the glass (about 84mm of width, whole length).
I wrote that the Powerlook 3000 was "updated".
In fact, the original Heidelberg Saphir HiRes had a limit: its internal row buffer was too small to allow exploiting the full resolution of the scanner.
The Powerlook 3000 had an updated mainboard with a larger buffer and could actually scan at the advertised resolution.
The problem with both models was focusing.
Those scanners had a dual-position focus: right on the glass bed and slightly over the glass (for film holders).
Obviously the lower focus position was intended for whole-area scanning at 1220x3048, while the upper position was for film mounted in the appropriate holders, positioned in the center of the glass and working with the higher resolution (3048x3048).
I had really a lot of issues in having the scanner selecting the appropriate focus distance; sometimes it worked, sometimes not.
Anyway I did not spend much time with either model, since the Epson V700 was giving me better results. Maybe with more patience one could work the issue out.
I did not try the Agfa T2500. The 1200 is vastly inferior to a V700; probably inferior to a 4990 as well.
