Any news on the new Plustek 120 scanner?

[Jamie123]

I hope, one day, for a scanner that has built in ANR glass. I'd love to have a (removable?) glass insert which was lowered onto the film to hold it in place. Or the film could be raised up to the glass to hold it in place and eliminate curling. I like the results I get using the better scanning holders with my v500, but sometimes it doesnt get rid of all the curling and the solution is kind of fiddly due to the nature of flatbed setup.

Doesn't sound very practical. That built in ANR glass would probably gather quite a lot of dust. Even if it was removable (how?) you'd have to take it out to clean every time you scan to eliminate dust.

The Flextight system of bending the film to avoid curling still seems like a good idea to me. I wonder why more manufacturers haven't gone that way. Does Hasselblad have a patent on it?

 

[david.elliott]

Doesn't sound very practical. That built in ANR glass would probably gather quite a lot of dust. Even if it was removable (how?) you'd have to take it out to clean every time you scan to eliminate dust.

The Flextight system of bending the film to avoid curling still seems like a good idea to me. I wonder why more manufacturers haven't gone that way. Does Hasselblad have a patent on it?

How? Just slide it in a slot that sits above the flim holder. Remove from same slot. Or any number of other ways. Would be easier to sketch, but I don't have the time for that. Not that it would matter anyway since I am not a plustek designer / engineer. 😛

 

[Jamie123]

How? Just slide it in a slot that sits above the flim holder. Remove from same slot. Or any number of other ways. Would be easier to sketch, but I don't have the time for that. Not that it would matter anyway since I am not a plustek designer / engineer. 😛

So you'd need a seperate slot and a seperate mechanism and motor to get the glass into position? And then another mechanism to lower the glass onto the film holder?

I know you're just spitballing here and I'm no engineer either but that sounds like the kind of thing that would significantly drive up the price, size and weight of a scanner. And for what? To save you the trouble of lowering the glass onto the holder yourself? On my Nikon 9000 glass holder it takes me all of half a second to do this.

 

[XFer]

Does Hasselblad have a patent on it?

Yes.
http://www.google.com/patents/US6081352

 

[david.elliott]

So you'd need a seperate slot and a seperate mechanism and motor to get the glass into position? And then another mechanism to lower the glass onto the film holder?

I know you're just spitballing here and I'm no engineer either but that sounds like the kind of thing that would significantly drive up the price, size and weight of a scanner. And for what? To save you the trouble of lowering the glass onto the holder yourself? On my Nikon 9000 glass holder it takes me all of half a second to do this.

I never said anything about a separate slot or a motor. I am an engineer, but that is not particularly relevant.

The point would be to have a nice, integral system for controlling film curvature. As I said above, it was just a thought and one of any number of solutions for the issue. Flimsy holders which only go around the outer borders of the film strip often do little to control the curvature.

 

[XFer]

Any news about the OpticFilm 120?
Are we going to see it in (web)stores before summer?

 

[pixelatedscraps]

This new high-end scanner, if all they are aiming for is 9000 ED quality, should be retailing at about half the price of a 9000 ED. $3000 is a LOT to ask for a film scanner in 2012. If what we want is quality on par with a scanner that was introduced close to a decade ago, technology strides should mean that we shouldn't be paying the same as one did for a Coolscan 9000 ED.

The supposed 10k dpi sensor (if going by current Plustek norms) is more likely going to have a real resolution of roughly half that, slightly above the 9000 ED. Whether or not it is better quality is something that we'll find out in due course.

I do applaud Plustek (and Reflecta) for continuing to innovate in a market which many of us thought was a stagnant, dying one with the demise of high-end Canon, Konica-Minolta and Nikon scanners. Well done.

I would be extremely interested in purchasing one.

Just my two cents.

 

[Jamie123]

This new high-end scanner, if all they are aiming for is 9000 ED quality, should be retailing at about half the price of a 9000 ED. $3000 is a LOT to ask for a film scanner in 2012. If what we want is quality on par with a scanner that was introduced close to a decade ago, technology strides should mean that we shouldn't be paying the same as one did for a Coolscan 9000 ED.

Why should it cost half? The Nikon 9000ED retailed for about $2000 and now it sells for twice as much used. And that's for a scanner that actually is 10 years old. Just because it might be cheaper to make nowadays doesn't mean they have to sell it for less.

 

[XFer]

I second Jamie.
And, why a consumer/semipro scanner should be cheaper today?
For example, flatbeds cost more today than 10 years ago (see Epson V750 vs. Epson 3200).
A scanner is made of R&D, lens, sensor, gears and motors, electronics, shell.

R&D costs are just as high today as they were 10 years ago: wages for engineers have not declined, on the contrary (well, save for my own wage, grrrrrr!).

Lenses cost more and more, partly because of new anti-pollution laws (costly lead-free glasses etc.)

Motors and gears have not declined in price, AFAIK.

Sensor and electronics, yes, cost a bit less now, but scanners use linear CCDs and they still sell for $$$ (unlike CMOS sensors).

Plastic cost is somehow tied to energy cost and petrol cost, both very high today.

Rising energy costs and higher tax pressure, on the other side, mean that a EU company like Plustek has more expenses now than 10 years ago.

So I don't expect the OpticFilm 120 to cost less than $1500. It's just wishful thinking for a quality scanner.

It they manage to keep the actual street price just under Eur 2000 including VAT (Eur 1600 without VAT: that's about $2000), they will have a tremendous price/performance ratio, provided the image quality (and reliability) is on par with the Nikon LS-9000 ED.

 

[david.elliott]

The plustek 7600i SE is available for less than $300. It performs admirably compared to it's nikon counterparts. A 120 scanner priced for 5-10x that amount ($1500 - $3000) creates a huge price gap and prices out a lot of people, potentially hurting overall revenue generated from the product.

If anything, plustek's 35mm scanners have shown that you can have a very good quality scanner without breaking the bank. I would hope that 120 scanner would continue along the same lines. I expect that the price will be higher than the 7600 model, but would hope that it would be fairly close and not priced at 5-10x.

Just because some of you want to pay a couple thousand dollars doesnt mean that one needs to pay that amount to get a quality scanner. Just because older nikon scanners cost a few thousand new and cost more new doe snot mean that one needs to pay that amount to get a quality scanner.

 

[johannielscom]

Any news about the OpticFilm 120?
Are we going to see it in (web)stores before summer?

But...
is there an answer to this question? Anybody from Plustek here (I know they are on the forum...)?

 

[XFer]

You don't seem to get the point.
Just because a 24x36 scanner costs say $500, does not mean that a 60x120 scanner can cost $800.
It does not work like that.
The lens alone is going to cost at least 5x more, because it will have to cover a much larger area (8x larger, in fact) *and* will have to deliver a higher resolution at the same time (say 5000 actual dpi vs. 3600 actual dpi).

The sensor will be probably 3x longer, and higher quality (10600 claimed dpi, let's say half that actually, still high resolution).

The gears will have to ensure higher precision *and* for longer travel *and* for a much heavier load.

The film holders will have to be in another league vs. 35mm ones, in order to keep 120 film reasonably flat.

In the old days, 120 Nikon Coolscan scanners did cost 2.5x the same model in 35mm version (8000 vs. 4000, then 9000 vs. 5000).

It's not being greedy, it's how costs work out.

At $1500 you can already purchase the Reflecta/Pacific Image 120 scanner: reviews are out there, you get what you pay for.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

But...
is there an answer to this question? Anybody from Plustek here (I know they are on the forum...)?

Yes, but an employee can't say much on a forum until the company has announced a date.

I really welcome company employees showing up on these forums to clarify and expand on official company information and sometimes solve problems. That goes for Plustek, B&H, Adorama, and others.

 

[XFer]

They will release a formal announcement in a few weeks, it seems.
That said, I was told (some time ago) that the scanner should be available "in Summer".
We're almost in Summer. 🙂

 

[Speedfreak]

I wonder why Nikon stopped making filmscanners altogether.

They could simply crank out their 10 year old technology in China and sell them for a nice profit. Look at what people are paying second hand.

 

[XFer]

They could not sell those scanners in EU anymore, due to ROHS laws (similar laws are spreading outside EU).
Redesigning the scanners (electronics, lenes, ...) to be compliant with ROHS was judged not worth of (no return of investment).
Too bad. :-(

 

[david.elliott]

You don't seem to get the point.
Just because a 24x36 scanner costs say $500, does not mean that a 60x120 scanner can cost $800.
It does not work like that.
The lens alone is going to cost at least 5x more, because it will have to cover a much larger area (8x larger, in fact) *and* will have to deliver a higher resolution at the same time (say 5000 actual dpi vs. 3600 actual dpi).

The sensor will be probably 3x longer, and higher quality (10600 claimed dpi, let's say half that actually, still high resolution).

The gears will have to ensure higher precision *and* for longer travel *and* for a much heavier load.

The film holders will have to be in another league vs. 35mm ones, in order to keep 120 film reasonably flat.

In the old days, 120 Nikon Coolscan scanners did cost 2.5x the same model in 35mm version (8000 vs. 4000, then 9000 vs. 5000).

It's not being greedy, it's how costs work out.

At $1500 you can already purchase the Reflecta/Pacific Image 120 scanner: reviews are out there, you get what you pay for.

2.5x =/= 5x or 10x

 

[johannielscom]

They will release a formal announcement in a few weeks, it seems.
That said, I was told (some time ago) that the scanner should be available "in Summer".
We're almost in Summer. 🙂

Sounds good. I'm close to investing in a new scanner, the current Microtek is not good enough at 1200 dpi for scanning Rolleiflex 6x6's...

My money is waiting for a good new home... 😀

 

[XFer]

2.5x =/= 5x or 10x

Yeah, right.
Too bad the 4000ED/5000ED and the 8000ED/9000ED were essentially similar products in 35 and 120 version.
The 7600 and the OpticFilm 120 will be as different as a cheap city car and a midrange sedan, so the price differential is going to be substantial. I bet 5x to 8x.
The 120 equivalent of the 7600 is the already mentioned MF 5000 from Reflecta.
We don't need another cheapo scanner with ho-hum performances. We already have the MF5000 for that, it makes no sense having two similar products competing in the same segment.
We need a 9000 ED replacement/improvement.

 

[david.elliott]

I'm not going to belabor the point any more with you. I've had enough wasting my time.

We'll just have to wait and see what plustek comes out with both in terms of price and performance.