brbo
Well-known
or you can just put your negs under a book for a few days
You can put it under a piano for a year and it will sag in the holder after 10 seconds into the scanning.
(at least 120 format, but nobody is buying this scanner to scan 135 only, right?)
kanzlr
Hexaneur
But then I had no problem with my 120 scans yet, only with single pieces of 35mm film, and SOME unevenness with 35mm film strips at the first two frames that are not held down in the holder, as it has a panorama window there for XPan or similar negatives.
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃı&
Mark, it's really great that you're following this and other threads! Is there any news on when Plustek will make available a unit for testing? I read that dpreview might review it (and perhaps other sites?).
Cheers
Philip
XFer
-
or you can just put your negs under a book for a few days
If it works for you, excellent!
My negatives just return to their original curling after a few minutes.
bigeye
Well-known
Fabio, you might want to take the crop from the center of the image which should be the camera's focus point and the best resolution/contrast area of the lens.
That said, this is still good for 35mm... Thanks for doing this.
-Charlie
mdruziak
Established
We need to get all the pre-orders filled before we go out en masse with review units. There will be a couple exceptions to this so a couple editors can meet deadlines.
One other thing. If you really have suggestions after using the scanner, please send them to my email or PM me. I'm not going to scan these posts for suggestions.
One other thing. If you really have suggestions after using the scanner, please send them to my email or PM me. I'm not going to scan these posts for suggestions.
fventura
Established
I'll be a bit busy today and tomorrow, but I will be scanning some more stuff. I can post more crops later this week.
I think what I am getting out of 35mm is pretty good, it sure blows away the fuji acros scans i got n the past from a Noritsu. (Let's not even mention the Epson V600 I had... wanna buy it? Good price)
Fábio
fventura
Established
I agree with you, I am pretty happy. 2K is a lot of money for me right now, but compared to the v700/750, or worse, a used Nikon 9000, this is darn good.
But I am all ears to what the more demanding users/experts have to say, there's always room for improvement.
A real professional review should help with getting the most out this scanner.
Fábio
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
So far, for my purposes those scans DO look very good indeed. I can see a second scanner in my future. Thanks Fabio for all the scans. It's appreciated!!
Cheers,
Dave
Cheers,
Dave
beezil
Established
tell me about it....
going crazy looking at my scanner, tried it a few times, like what i see.
i own/operate a business and can't seem to take that hat off and concentrate on dialing in this scanner and the proper workflow.
I'm looking forward to a chance to sit down and get into it.
fabio, have you determined a "winning combination" of scan settings yet?
fventura
Established
Ah, I know all about owning a business, I had bought a Pizza Shop in 1993, (instead of going to Photography School...) Oh boy, I sold my part in 2008...
I don't miss the 75 to 95 hours a week with random days off, etc etc
Anyway, for the most part, for shots that I know are not going to win any awards or be printed large, I scan at 2650 or 3200dpi to get things going fast. No isrd speed things up a lot, and gets more detail. Occasionally I use it. Some of my old negatives are too messed up, and will never be printed large anyway.
Everything else is just practice, and watching tutorials etc. Using Silverfast for the first time is a head ache, but after awhile it is better than it seems, I think.
No sure yet if ME is worth the time, I need to experiment more. And oh boy, do I need to brush up on my Velvia exposures, they are almost all underexposed...
Anyway, feel free to PM me if you have any specific questions when you get going
Take care,
Fabio
fventura
Established
Velvia 100,
canon eos 3, 70-200 f2.8
Scanned at 5300, no iSRD, I think (to me) scanning larger than this is overkill.
Some sharpening in SF and LR4, plus other adjustments in LR. ( I like to scan somewhat flat and finish in post).
Lab was Agx, great customer support, fast turn around, good prices
CROP:
I looks pretty darn good for me, for 35mm. My 70-200 is the is version I, it is not as good as the version II. And of course, if I stopped down a bit, it would be better.
Fábio
LINK to lab:
http://www.agximaging.com/
(E6 only, I think)
canon eos 3, 70-200 f2.8
Scanned at 5300, no iSRD, I think (to me) scanning larger than this is overkill.
Some sharpening in SF and LR4, plus other adjustments in LR. ( I like to scan somewhat flat and finish in post).
Lab was Agx, great customer support, fast turn around, good prices
CROP:
I looks pretty darn good for me, for 35mm. My 70-200 is the is version I, it is not as good as the version II. And of course, if I stopped down a bit, it would be better.
Fábio
LINK to lab:
http://www.agximaging.com/
(E6 only, I think)
useless generation
Established
Looks great! I have the 7600i and I'm thinking of selling a few cameras to purchase one of these and a mamiya 7II. The detail from 120 will be exellent if these are from 35mm. Considering you can read the "52" on that window sticker!
dfatty
Well-known
thanks again for all the samples, fabio. looks really good to me, though i'm no expert. not bad for a scanner judged to be cr*p before anyone had even tried it.
smilem
Established
For me it looks like
a) the pustek has not the same horizontal/ vertical resolution. Remember there is resolution of carriage and resolution of sensor/optics.
b) there is a flaw with algorithm and it makes these jagies (not likely)
First thing I tried was to resize the 100crop version 50% is PS and it made no change, jagies are still there. And yes I tried all resizing options.
Considering you must use microcontrast adjustment anyway this is a serious problem,nobody want their scans look flat.
Exactly what I was thinking, someone from plustek obviously will eat their nails for not including he focus mechanism. When I asked my colegues would they buy a professional scanner that would scan better then Nikon9000 but had no autofocus, the answer was who could be crazy enought to try to maket such a thing in the first place, no autofocus means glass holders, dust problems etc. When I told them there are no glass holders their were shocked and said this scanner will be short lived for sure.
IMHO the companies just don't want to make one, 10 years have passed and we are introduced a scanner without autofocus? We have all there precision mechanics in HDD's for decades yet nobody makes scanner carriage that moves at least 1/10 as precise?
Plustek obviously did not want to sell the nikon9000 killer or anything close, they wanted to test the market to see would it be selling at all. Now if this model will sell OK, they should release updated version ASAP, otherwise nobody will be interested in buying it cause they will remember what crap was the first version, remember you lie once, and nobody will believe you afterwards. And so far the plustek opticfilm 120 is a lie.
Resolutions is not even 4000dpi
Microexposure doesn't work
Frames can't hold film flat (and mark druziak was swearing that it would)
Glass frames are nobody to be seen
Multiple passes just for the dust removal, doesn't seem high tech to me
I'm glad they released it but, why it must so cheaply made? Yet the price is so high.
smilem
Established
And I wonder what the professional reviews will say too, given the fact plustek obviously want to sell the scanner to the public and then give it to the reviewers - make the conclusion yourself.
A review with scanner teardown would be the only one I would like to see, either plustek will make more money selling frame holders or the internals are built so cheaply that they will be making money from after warranty servicing the scanners. Either way I don't seem how one would make this scanner work for thousands of slides they think it would scan.
A review with scanner teardown would be the only one I would like to see, either plustek will make more money selling frame holders or the internals are built so cheaply that they will be making money from after warranty servicing the scanners. Either way I don't seem how one would make this scanner work for thousands of slides they think it would scan.
fventura
Established
I don't know man,
maybe it is not up to the utmost standards, but I am happy it exists (at all).
If they build a better one in the future, more power to them. In the mean time I am a happy camper.
I just can't see (with what is available brand new, with warranty, support and selling for 2K or less) that can beat it. Maybe in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king!
fuji across, 100, canon 70-200, maybe at 2.8, and this lens is not known to be super sharp at 2.8. This was either 5300, I might have actually done it at 5000dpi, it's either one.
crop
Thanks
PS I see some vertical lines around the headlamp, it might be fixable in post
maybe it is not up to the utmost standards, but I am happy it exists (at all).
If they build a better one in the future, more power to them. In the mean time I am a happy camper.
I just can't see (with what is available brand new, with warranty, support and selling for 2K or less) that can beat it. Maybe in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king!
fuji across, 100, canon 70-200, maybe at 2.8, and this lens is not known to be super sharp at 2.8. This was either 5300, I might have actually done it at 5000dpi, it's either one.
crop
Thanks
PS I see some vertical lines around the headlamp, it might be fixable in post
smilem
Established
I'm too glad they made it, but how long until the holders can't meet close tolerances to make scans like this? They are plastic you know. And like I said we do not know how the insides are made, are they cheap and perhaps will fail no matter what holder you use.
Oh they will build better one, but if it will cost like 3000-4000$ it will be overkill. There are companies that make half a million dollar film scanning machines for 16mm film you know and I don't blame them, if stupid consumers pay that much then why sell it cheaper.
But the warranty will come to an end, you will have to pay for servicing then.
PS I see some vertical lines around the headlamp, it might be fixable in post
While it's worth to pixel correct for your own slides, who would use this in professional enviroment? Nobody - they would be bankrupt devoting so much time in post processing IMHO.
smilem
Established
BTW Epson V750 doesn't give jagies and it's 2x cheaper, built in some garage in china with dust and fogged glass it still better engineered. (from engineering standpoint)
fventura
Established
I was just playing about the vertical lines around the head lights, those are there as part of the head light trim...