good to know! I may do just that for my 8000...
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I continue to use my reliable Nikon Coolscan V ED, driven by VueScan. A 36-shot roll is six strips, scanned in batch mode with the settings I defined an eternity ago. I don't know precisely how long it takes, I rarely scan more than one roll in a session.
I can use the Super Coolscan 9000 for two strips per batch ... More setup time, but a bit more automated. Or I can use the BEOON and Leica SL for maximum speed in capture, and spend more time in image processing to do inversion and gamma correction. It all works out to be very similar in total time spent.
When time is an issue, I switch to a digital camera.
G
I can use the Super Coolscan 9000 for two strips per batch ... More setup time, but a bit more automated. Or I can use the BEOON and Leica SL for maximum speed in capture, and spend more time in image processing to do inversion and gamma correction. It all works out to be very similar in total time spent.
When time is an issue, I switch to a digital camera.
G
froyd
Veteran
I can see the appeal of the Pakon, especially for its color rendition on cheap emulsions, but for the money, the limitations are too severe. Some of the turn of for me are distortion, cropping, and blocked up details/higher contrast than I'd like.
Not familiar with distortion, or cropping? Contrast is of course set to user preference. Any scanner is quite capable of poor scans just like any camera can shoot a poor photo. That's where the operator comes in. 
My tests with a light pad and BEOON provided great results but required significantly more time, even after writing some custom photoshop actions. The scanning wasn't unattended and the post scan workflow was significant. This was determined over a couple of months time, sufficient for a fair comparison.
Digital is definitely the overall speed king, but when I'm shooting film it's still valuable to maximize efficiency. There are simply too many things in life pulling me in different directions so the faster a roll can be produced the more time is available to shoot another.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
So, in 2016 the answer is the same with 2015, 2014... : Pakon?
Personally I have not seen any significant in scanning technology recently.
I doubt that we still have to stuck with old stuffs currently available.
Personally I have not seen any significant in scanning technology recently.
I doubt that we still have to stuck with old stuffs currently available.
There are lots of excellent scanners, used and new. The answer to the topic is pretty clear if the budget allows. If not, there are excellent alternatives that will take more time and provide some features the Pakon can't.
benmacphoto
Well-known
When I got into scanning I thought of getting a Pakon to scan the whole roll, then use the Nikon for higher resolution scans of select images.
But I did the SA-21 hack to make it think it's a SA-30.
So I let it scan the whole roll while I do other things.
Still would like a Pakon to test against my other scanners though.
But I did the SA-21 hack to make it think it's a SA-30.
So I let it scan the whole roll while I do other things.
Still would like a Pakon to test against my other scanners though.
froyd
Veteran
Not familiar with distortion, or cropping? Contrast is of course set to user preference. Any scanner is quite capable of poor scans just like any camera can shoot a poor photo. That's where the operator comes in.
If you join the Facebook group (highly recommended) and search posts for "crop" or "maximize crop" you find hack to help captuer more of what's on the negative, but even with those, the Pakon does not get to the edges of the negative. This is a small issue for RF shooters for obvious reasons, but SLR user might feel differently.
You can run a similar search for "distortion" and read about the vertical compression of images (not clear to me if this is just through TXL). There are a few examples of images scanned w/Pakon and Frontier or other device.
Re contrast, I used the wrong vocabulary. Average performance in reading through dense negs results on lost detail that looks like higher contrast.
Yeah, I helped launch the group. I've layered Pakon scans on top of Noritsu scans and haven't seen any distortion issues but I don't use TLX Client Demo app
Jhausler
Established
Agree.. plus I happen to be selling one if anyone is interested
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...35mm-film-scanner-2c-rb67-polaroid-back/cat/6
I would put a box on a stool and the scanner on top of that... set it and FORGET IT!
Decent support too from the company, I called in with some questions, and they were very knowledgable. Plus no need for a virtual machine like with the pakon.