Any news on the new Plustek 120 scanner?

Glad to hear some news.

I used quite a few scanners, from Felxtight to Plustek to the Nikons. My current 9000 ED is giving me periodical grievances (Come to think of it, maybe I should bring it flowers from time to time... Or pay it a compliment every so often), so I'm following this with great interest.

It would be nice to have a quality scanner that is supported.

Good luck!
 
morback said:
It would be nice to have a quality scanner that is supported.
Click to expand...

It seems like the Plustek scanner is going to run using Silverfast so I guess you'll have to turn to LaserSoft for support. I think Silverfast is a decent software but IMO LaserSoft is a crappy company for massively overcharging owners of expensive scanners when the software is basically identical with the one for cheaper scanners.
 
If/when it'll see the light, I'm sure Vuescan would support it.
I was able to drive even a Heidelberg Saphir HiRes (recently!) with Vuescan!
 
brbo said:
I actually think that a scanner that equals or betters Nikon 9000 (as hinted by Mark) for $2k is both superb and inexpensive (considering the market).
Click to expand...

Agreed!

Of course with same features (autofocus, very effective IR dust removal, excellent color fidelity and stability, good mechanics, corner-to-corner sharp lens etc.).
 
XFer said:
I was able to drive even a Heidelberg Saphir HiRes (recently!) with Vuescan!
Click to expand...

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...
 
brbo said:
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...
Click to expand...

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.
 
That negative carrier looks good!

Two biggest problems I'm having with the 7400 style negative carrier:

1. Not enough clamp to lock down that pesky Kodak Saint Louis Arch

2. Negative carrier crops my pictures for me! Took the dremel to it once but was too reserved. Gotta try it again.

Really looking forward to the Plustek 120 for this and other reasons.
 
I know there are lots of questions about the date. As soon as I can share something I will. But I WILL NOT post an availability date until I am certain that date will be met. I don't want to mislead anyone.
 
Could you share some infos about "price range"?
For example:
"Price range will be $1500-$2000 excluding taxes" :)
Or:
"Price range will be $2500-$3000 exluding taxes" :-(

Even a convoluted hint would do. ;-)
 
Face Book of Plustek 120

Face Book of Plustek 120

There is a much discussion on Plustek's facebook page on 27 April.
I copied this:

"Plustek Technology ‎Mário Venda Nova I spoke with our CTO a few weeks ago and he said our design goal was to build a better scanner than the Nikon 9000. We will not release this scanner until we are sure the image quality and reliability are where they need to be.
Yesterday at 1:48pm · Like · 4"


I cannot wait!

Regards

eugene
 
So what does that mean? We won't see the scanner for another 2 years, and it may be retailed at $3500??

I'm really not sure that's good news.
 
rawhead said:
So what does that mean? We won't see the scanner for another 2 years, and it may be retailed at $3500??

I'm really not sure that's good news.
Click to expand...

Chatter on their facebook page from their company man says "less than $3k for sure"
 
david.elliott said:
3k is awfully expensive and will price out a huge number of people. :|
Click to expand...

+1. I really want this to be affordable, and 2,999 would not help.
That's 250 rolls of 120 scanned and process by Precision Camera.
Nothing for a profesional's budget, big number for mere mortals.
*crossing fingers
 
You're almost to a used M9 at that pricepoint ($3k). Whether the output of an M9 can equal that of scanned MF film is a topic of debate, but I would rather have the M9.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom