Plustek 120 vs Epson V700/750

[Orbiter]

I'm following the discussions about the new Plustek scanner with great interest because my aging Epson V700 will need replacing one of these days. Could one of you with experience using both the Plustek 120 and Epson V700 or V750 provide your opinion about how results from those scanners compare? To set the context, I print 35mm negatives at sizes up to 12 X 18 inches and medium format up to 16 X 20 inches on an Epson 3800 printer.

Are the scans from the Plustek producing results that will likely look better when printed at those sizes than scans from one of the Epson scanners? Or do you think the results in prints those sizes would be about the same?

 

[SixSeven]

Oooh boy...

 

[mfogiel]

"I print 35mm negatives at sizes up to 12 X 18 inches"
If you do that from your Epson V700, then almost any dedicated film scanner will do better.

 

[V-12]

Are the scans from the Plustek producing results that will likely look better when printed at those sizes than scans from one of the Epson scanners? Or do you think the results in prints those sizes would be about the same?

Any Plustek scanner will do better 35mm scans than the V700. The V700 shines with MF and LF, but the light source is too diffused for 35mm. So a dedicated 35mm scanner is all you need, any of the Plustek models will do because they are all the same, the only difference is software bundled with them. So you can save yourself the considerable price of the Plustek 120.

 

[thegman]

I think if you're looking at the photo from a metre away or other normal distance, you're not going to tell the difference. Up close, you will tell the difference. However, if you're happy with the results you're getting from the Epson, I'd stick with it.

 

[XFer]

To set the context, I print 35mm negatives at sizes up to 12 X 18 inches

I don't have the Plustek 120.
Anyway, this is a 100% crop from a 35mm scan prepared for an A3+ print (I think it's 13"x19" ?).
Minolta 5400-II (at least as good as the Plustek 120... maybe quite better) vs. Epson V700 with Betterscanning holder.

 

[Orbiter]

Thanks for the information, your comments are very helpful. And will save me money to spend on film (what's not to like about that?).

 

[Rogier]

Can't tell the difference other than $1200

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

I don't have the Plustek 120.
Anyway, this is a 100% crop from a 35mm scan prepared for an A3+ print (I think it's 13"x19" ?).
Minolta 5400-II (at least as good as the Plustek 120... maybe quite better) vs. Epson V700 with Betterscanning holder.

Xfer, what do you think of this comparison?

I can see differences favoring the Minolta if I look for fine detail in the crop. But, overall, I'm impressed by how well the V700 performs.

 

[XFer]

Xfer, what do you think of this comparison?

I can see differences favoring the Minolta if I look for fine detail in the crop. But, overall, I'm impressed by how well the V700 performs.

I totally agree with you.

The Minolta scan is no doubt better; sharper, richer, more "pure", no CA (and required way less sharpening), but the V700 with Betterscanning holder is quite a surprise: we are enlarging the frame 13x here!!
And, it covers 4x5" at this quality (8x10" scans are worse because you have to switch to the other lens, more coverage but inferior sharpness).

Important notice: Betterscanning holders are not free; quite pricey, indeed.
They are really important to achieve maximum sharpness from the V700.
I found the optimal height (they are finely adjustable) doing 10+ hi-res scans of a resolution chart; tedious, but it pays off.

Fernando

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Ah, yes. I didn't see the CA at first, but now that you mention it, I do.

Minolta on the left, correct?

And, you have the colors matching very well. Are the original scans this close in color, or did you have to fine-tune?

 

[XFer]

Ah, yes. I didn't see the CA at first, but now that you mention it, I do.

Minolta on the left, correct?

And, you have the colors matching very well. Are the original scans this close in color, or did you have to fine-tune?

Yes, Minolta on the left; colors were already matched because I have made ICC profiles for each scanner (using IT8 targets from targets.coloraid.de and the Profile Prism software from www.ddisoftware.com).

Fernando

 

[anerjee]

I don't have the Plustek 120.
Anyway, this is a 100% crop from a 35mm scan prepared for an A3+ print (I think it's 13"x19" ?).
Minolta 5400-II (at least as good as the Plustek 120... maybe quite better) vs. Epson V700 with Betterscanning holder.

I did not realize that there is a 35mm holder from Betterscanning? Or is this the ANR glass insert?

Very impressed with your v700 scan -- much better than what I am able to get. Would you please let us know how you use the scanner, other than the custom holders? What software/settings etc?

 

[rjstep3]

Hello World

Hello World

this is my first post on RFF - I have just come back to film after a flirtation with digital. I have a large number of slides/negatives to scan - hence my interest in this question.

I don't know what the best settings are to achieve the best results in the Epson v700. Is it best to set the highest resolution possible, or is it better to adjust the target size?

Does anyone know a good guide which gives hints and tips - I have wasted so much time waiting for scans to complete. What is better, 300 dpi at 400% or 2400 dpi at 100%? I just don't know.

thanks
rjstep3

 

[XFer]

I did not realize that there is a 35mm holder from Betterscanning? Or is this the ANR glass insert?

I use the 4x5" non-ANR holder for everything, from 35mm strips to 4x5". 🙂
To extract the maximum quality, I use wet mounting; in particular, "reverse wet mounting".
With a friend we did a video tutorial; it's in italian, but I think video is more important than audio in this case:

http://www.effeunoequattro.net/htdocs/freecontent/videotutorial/index.php

Would you please let us know how you use the scanner, other than the custom holders? What software/settings etc?

I use Vuescan in Advanced mode.
I scan at 6400 ppi, 48 bit and save a copy as is, for archivial purpose; then I resample in Photoshop to whatever final size I need. Sharpening is the last pass; I convert in LAB and apply a Smart Sharpen on the L channel only (to avoid chroma noise buildup). For Smart Sharpen I set "Remove Lens Blur" and "More Accurate". This way, Photoshop switches to a very good algorithm (a simplified version of Richardson-Lucy deconvolution), instead of crude old unsharp mask.

Colors: I built ICC profiles for my scanners using Wolf Faust's IT8 targets (targets.coloraid.de), with Profile Prism from DDI Software (same guy of QImage).
Anyway Vuescan Professional has the ability to generate a (simpler) ICC profile itself (you still need an IT8 target slide); not as effective, but good enough.
I optimize exposure to be sure that the full dynamic range of the film is captured (maximum scanner exposure without clipping), with the help of Vuescan's exposure histogram (Raw histogram, Logarithmic scale).
Color Balance is set to None (the ICC profile takes care of scanner white balance).

Another V700 comparison here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129085

My full review of V700 (in italian, but there are many images which may help) here:
http://www.effeunoequattro.net/htdocs/freecontent/FC_ProvaV700/index.php

Fernando