wblynch
Well-known
$995 US is my limit
gavinlg
Veteran
$1200us limit, preferably under $1000. Good optics and good Dmax.
neelin
Established
- 6x9, 6x12, 6x17 capable
-great dmax
-high performance flat negative carrier
-great dmax
-high performance flat negative carrier
stevebrot
Established
How about something like this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...FILM_120_PrimeFilm_120_Multi_Format_Film.html
at the same price point or lower with batch scanning capability and support for ANR glass carrier/wet mount.
Steve
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...FILM_120_PrimeFilm_120_Multi_Format_Film.html
at the same price point or lower with batch scanning capability and support for ANR glass carrier/wet mount.
Steve
crist
Crist
Check this
Image quality
Now we come to the most important part of our test that is the image quality of the Plustek OpticFilm 7600i. According to the producer, the image quality has been optimized and the deficits as for example the bad working dust and scratch correction of the previous model have been eliminated. Now we will see if this also applies in practice.
We start with the resolution test: during a test scan with the USAF-1951 target with a maximum resolution of 7200ppi, the horizontal and vertical lines of the element 6.1 are hard to distinguish. According to our Resolution Table this results in an effective resolution of about 3250ppi. Thus, in practice, the Plustek OpticFilm 7600i does not even provide 50% of the resolution that is mentioned in the package. Compared to the previous model Plustek OpticFilm 7500i, the effective resolution of 3500 dpi has worsen to 3250 dpi. It is annoying if one purchases a scanner that in practice only provides 43% of the resolution that is actually promised by the producer.
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Plust...Film7600i.html
What do you think?
Now what??
Image quality
Now we come to the most important part of our test that is the image quality of the Plustek OpticFilm 7600i. According to the producer, the image quality has been optimized and the deficits as for example the bad working dust and scratch correction of the previous model have been eliminated. Now we will see if this also applies in practice.
We start with the resolution test: during a test scan with the USAF-1951 target with a maximum resolution of 7200ppi, the horizontal and vertical lines of the element 6.1 are hard to distinguish. According to our Resolution Table this results in an effective resolution of about 3250ppi. Thus, in practice, the Plustek OpticFilm 7600i does not even provide 50% of the resolution that is mentioned in the package. Compared to the previous model Plustek OpticFilm 7500i, the effective resolution of 3500 dpi has worsen to 3250 dpi. It is annoying if one purchases a scanner that in practice only provides 43% of the resolution that is actually promised by the producer.
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Plust...Film7600i.html
What do you think?
Now what??
crawdiddy
qu'est-ce que c'est?
Fascinating discussion.
I just purchased a Plustek OpticFilm 7300 on the evil bay. Can someone please tell me what features will be missing from this unit, compared to a 7600? I know it's still 7200 dpi. I know it comes with Silverfast s/w. I believe what may be missing is Infrared dust removal s/w, but I've heard this is only effective with color film anyway. Anything else?
I realize my toleration of 3-year-old scanning technology may brand me as a bottom feeder, even among photo geeks who shoot 50-year-old cameras. But tell me anyway. I can take it.
I just purchased a Plustek OpticFilm 7300 on the evil bay. Can someone please tell me what features will be missing from this unit, compared to a 7600? I know it's still 7200 dpi. I know it comes with Silverfast s/w. I believe what may be missing is Infrared dust removal s/w, but I've heard this is only effective with color film anyway. Anything else?
I realize my toleration of 3-year-old scanning technology may brand me as a bottom feeder, even among photo geeks who shoot 50-year-old cameras. But tell me anyway. I can take it.
mdruziak
Established
Hi, Mark from Plustek here.
The 7300 you have is comparable to the current OpticFilm 7400. Except the 7400 has LED illumination (no warmup) and it doesn't have the slide illuminator on the top like the 7300.
The 7600i series scanner have infrared based dust and scratch removal and the 7600i Ai scanner has IT8 calibration. The IR dust and scratch removal will not work with silver halide based B/W films.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Mark
crawdiddy
qu'est-ce que c'est?
Mark, thanks for the response!
I think it's great you're trolling the waters here. As you've no doubt realized, this is a very active group of users interested in scanning, and other image processing topics.
The forum is the first place I heard of Plustek. And I probably would have dismissed the company other than the fact that RFF members compare your products favorably to brands such as Nikon, Epson, Canon, etc.
I think it's great you're trolling the waters here. As you've no doubt realized, this is a very active group of users interested in scanning, and other image processing topics.
The forum is the first place I heard of Plustek. And I probably would have dismissed the company other than the fact that RFF members compare your products favorably to brands such as Nikon, Epson, Canon, etc.
Pete B
Well-known
Hi Mark,
I just wondered if Plustek have ever approached Kodak suggesting their boffins design a sensor/software combination solely for Plustek scanners giving perfect, push-the-big-red-button results with their Portra and Ektar films. You sell the perfect scanner, they sell the film for the scanner, we use the film. Everyone's a winner and Kodak film production and Plustek's longevity is assured
Pete
goo0h
Well-known
BTW, I just upgraded to SilverFast 8 so I could upgrade my Mac to Lion. A bit of a shame that I had to fork out a chunk of change for the upgrade, but at least it was discounted. However, I must say that the interface of SilverFast 8 is MUCH improved over the previous releases. I'm still trying to learn how to use it with black and white film, but so far I'm really liking this upgrade.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
Any news on that 120 capable scanner?
thx
thx
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Chiming in for a 120 dedicated scanner that I would buy:
Price $1000.
Format: 120 film only. Why would you spend more resource/design/tooling/material to make it 135 compatible? When my Coolscan V finally gave up, I'll buy the other existing Plustek scanners instead.
Quality: Resolution-wise, the same optics as your 35mm if possible, if not possible, the larger negative will make up for the amount of details. Dmax must be maintained or improved, though.
Auto-feed: Yes. If I want to mess with holders, I can do that all day long with my flatbed scanner now. This also eliminates the need for ANR glasses. If you must spend a lot on designing this one, it's worth it.
Software: Do not need it. Don't spend any resource developing your own software, just make sure the scanner works with Vuescan and Silverfast.
Computer Interface: USB3 (backward compatible). Don't bother with firewire or SCSI or worst: coming up with your own proprietary one.
Human Interface: We don't need any other buttons than On/Off (another cost saving point). Don't go the path of some scanners that offers goofy buttons for auto-this'n-that that *never* got used anyway.
Error Recovery: Provide a manual way to open the scanner to get out jammed film.
Packaging: Don't include USB cable, power cable, CD, manual, etc. Just give us a solid scanner, in a sturdy black box with your logo and model number, we can find the other stuff easy enough. Another cost saving point.
Price $1000.
Format: 120 film only. Why would you spend more resource/design/tooling/material to make it 135 compatible? When my Coolscan V finally gave up, I'll buy the other existing Plustek scanners instead.
Quality: Resolution-wise, the same optics as your 35mm if possible, if not possible, the larger negative will make up for the amount of details. Dmax must be maintained or improved, though.
Auto-feed: Yes. If I want to mess with holders, I can do that all day long with my flatbed scanner now. This also eliminates the need for ANR glasses. If you must spend a lot on designing this one, it's worth it.
Software: Do not need it. Don't spend any resource developing your own software, just make sure the scanner works with Vuescan and Silverfast.
Computer Interface: USB3 (backward compatible). Don't bother with firewire or SCSI or worst: coming up with your own proprietary one.
Human Interface: We don't need any other buttons than On/Off (another cost saving point). Don't go the path of some scanners that offers goofy buttons for auto-this'n-that that *never* got used anyway.
Error Recovery: Provide a manual way to open the scanner to get out jammed film.
Packaging: Don't include USB cable, power cable, CD, manual, etc. Just give us a solid scanner, in a sturdy black box with your logo and model number, we can find the other stuff easy enough. Another cost saving point.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
Found this on a Japanese site. A purported imagine of the upcoming Plustek 135/120 scanner. Key word here being 'purported'.
Maybe this coming spring? Sooner would be nicer...
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/426/498/html/10.jpg.html
Hoping for....
- A sharper lens.
- Better focus
- More dmax, but I have to admit that multi exposure in Silverfast works wonders...
- USB3 sure would be nice...
- Glass film holders for 135/120/xpan. Even if they are sold separately. This is a big deal (I'm looking at you Plustek)
- LED lighting
- I can live with manual advance if the savings are plowed in to boosting scan quality (better optics etc)
I would be willing to pay serious money if this unit performed as good as a 9000ED without automatic film advance.
But regardless I will get one to proof negs, before final scanning on the 9000ED or an Imacon/Drumscan.
Maybe this coming spring? Sooner would be nicer...
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/426/498/html/10.jpg.html
Hoping for....
- A sharper lens.
- Better focus
- More dmax, but I have to admit that multi exposure in Silverfast works wonders...
- USB3 sure would be nice...
- Glass film holders for 135/120/xpan. Even if they are sold separately. This is a big deal (I'm looking at you Plustek)
- LED lighting
- I can live with manual advance if the savings are plowed in to boosting scan quality (better optics etc)
I would be willing to pay serious money if this unit performed as good as a 9000ED without automatic film advance.
But regardless I will get one to proof negs, before final scanning on the 9000ED or an Imacon/Drumscan.
Attachments
Last edited:
Foto-factotum
Established
Greetings Mark, I second the proposal that a meduim format high quality scanner could be developed. I am sure many expan users would also be interested.
I appreciate to be able to "talk" to the surplier directly. Keep up the good wor,
Regards
eugene
I appreciate to be able to "talk" to the surplier directly. Keep up the good wor,
Regards
eugene
mdruziak
Established
Gee nice photo!
I can't comment on products that aren't announced, but I will say that all of your comments and suggestions are appreciated. Keep them coming!
Mark
gavinlg
Veteran
Wow it looks like it might be coming soon? I quite like the exterior design, nice and simple.
If this scanner is good, I might just get back into film big-time.
gavinlg
Veteran
"Plustek the prototype of "high-end scanner 120" (tentative name) is a film scanner that corresponds to the size 6 × 9 and the brownie as well as 35mm. Price TBD, to be released in the summer. The company is also dealing with brand CABIN film scanners, he said the growing popularity of high-end models with high-quality needs. CCD sensor. The resolution is 8,000 dpi. The light source adopts the LED."
Harry Lime
Practitioner
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
This actually warrants a separate thread.
If those X100 hopefuls can hype the camera a year before it sees the light, we 120 scanner users should also, no?
If those X100 hopefuls can hype the camera a year before it sees the light, we 120 scanner users should also, no?
DerekF
Established
If this is real and ends up costing a fraction of the Coolscan 9000 (original MSRP —*not the outrageous prices they're going for now), sign me up for one.