The OFFICIAL Plustek 120 post your scans

[J. Borger]

If the grain is sharp and your subject/object is not as sharp as you would like, it means that the problem is not with the scanner but rather with focusing/camera shake/lens resolution...?

Thanks ...this makes sense. I thought he refered to scanner focussing issues.

 

[Photo_Smith]

without access to another scanner for comparison, is there an easy/idiotproof way of working out if the 120 has this focussing issue?

mamiya 7ii / arcros 100

Just looking on the larger one (3000px) in your Flickr account I noticed the poster in the centre front of the stage is sharp the one behind the singer is not, that with the sharp grain in the scan mean this is a camera focus point issue.

 

[kanzlr]

🙁 Why oh why they did not include focus adjustment!!!!!

cost.





.

 

[brbo]

Just looking on the larger one (3000px) in your Flickr account I noticed the poster in the centre front of the stage is sharp the one behind the singer is not, that with the sharp grain in the scan mean this is a camera focus point issue.

?! Why would he want to have a poster BEHIND the singer in focus?

The singer IS in focus.

 

[XFer]

cost.

I don't think so. A mechanical focus adjustment by way of an external wheel which acts on the carriage height would cost only a few dollars. Maybe 5% of the final price?
I did not write "autofocus" but "focus adjustment". Just to compensate once-in-a-while for offset issues (manifacture tolerances, wear, holder type, different season with different ambient temperature, etc.). You do a few scans with different wheel positions, you find the right height, and you're OK for some time (maybe even for the scanner's lifetime).

Fernando

 

[XFer]

without access to another scanner for comparison, is there an easy/idiotproof way of working out if the 120 has this focussing issue?

mamiya 7ii / arcros 100

It seems that your unit is working fine, I can't see any focus issue with your scanner.

If the grain is sharp without much unsharp masking, the scanner is in focus. Obviously, a sharp subject is another matter.

Fernando

 

[louisb]

I don't want to troll but I have to say that so far I haven't seen results from this scanner which justifies a price which is four times the cost of an Epson V700, which to all practical intents and purposes is the only alternative at present for 120 scanning (and which I've been using for nearly two years with the 'betterscanning' holder and special glass).

Maybe a slight improvement but not the quality improvement I was expecting from a dedicated negative scanner. I can see a smoother rendition and possibly some slight improvement in sharpness but nothing quantum.

This is disappointing. Am I missing something?

LouisB

 

[Photo_Smith]

?! Why would he want to have a poster BEHIND the singer in focus?

The singer IS in focus.

Er? surely you jest? The singer is out of focus, the poster behind out of focus; the point of focus is the poster in front of the singers.
Therefore the focus of the scanner is OK as the fault lies in the photographer focussing too close.
Not hard to understand!

 

[rdocksey]

"...as the fault lies in the photographer..."

hey! let's not get personal 🙂

but seriously.. thanks for all the useful comments. I find it hard to tell from just looking at each picture if there is a clear fault or not.. the earlier post with the comparison against the Nikon made things crystal clear.

 

[Ebertoni]

Hello Again, thanks for the positive attitude 😉

Here we go with some tests.
I know that the Epson v750 is soft and for this reason i bought an Opticfilm 120, the tests i saw in the past were pretty good and the scans i see around (i.e. Fabio Ventura) are good, the grain is sharp enough for me and it is as i supposed it should be 😉 and honestly i'm more than upset.:bang:

here a crop from a 6x7 Pentax negative

and here you can check the big images
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eptex4gwd0di5mm/RuD7Jo1Yml

Bye!

 

[Danlo]

I must say, that many of the results posted here look absolutely amazing in terms of resolution.. But I just bought the D600.. and now I have to live with the pain of not being able to afford the Plustek.. :'(

 

[BOD]

Yikes... That's very worrying!
I wish Mark would chime in and answer everyone's concern over the quality control issue...

 

[bwcolor]

I don't think so. A mechanical focus adjustment by way of an external wheel which acts on the carriage height would cost only a few dollars. Maybe 5% of the final price?
I did not write "autofocus" but "focus adjustment". Just to compensate once-in-a-while for offset issues (manifacture tolerances, wear, holder type, different season with different ambient temperature, etc.). You do a few scans with different wheel positions, you find the right height, and you're OK for some time (maybe even for the scanner's lifetime).

Fernando

I'm guessing that this will be done with a wet mount film holder and a price.

What would concern me is not that it is initially out of focus, but that after long use, the warranty lapses and the unit requires multiple service returns. I suppose by that time there will be a thread showing all of us how to make such an adjustment.

 

[XFer]

What would concern me is not that it is initially out of focus, but that after long use, the warranty lapses and the unit requires multiple service returns. I suppose by that time there will be a thread showing all of us how to make such an adjustment.

Sounds very optimistic, but I sure hope you're right. 🙁

Fernando

 

[beezil]

Yikes... That's very worrying!
I wish Mark would chime in and answer everyone's concern over the quality control issue...

A note here....

I have a Plustek120, and posted on the other "tricks, how-to" thread about two issues I was having. The first was a preview size and window issue. It seems the software was having trouble finding/recognizing the frame.

I was instructed to download the software directly from the plustek website, which I did. So far, so good.

Now, I also am having problems with focus. The mounted slides appear to be much worse than 6x6 and 6x7.


I will report that Mark Druziak and one of the engineers have contacted me, and has given me a list of things to check for him. This issue has certainly been given the attention it deserves, and these guys are as anxious to solve these problems as we are. I'm not trying to act as a spokesperson for Silverfast and Plustek, but I'd say it's doubtful that any of these folks have time to peruse the forums, and that anyone that is having problems with this scanner would do well to contact them directly. I am sure you will be given the same attention as I've gotten.

I did not get time during my busy weekend to verify and report on the things Mark and the engineer had inquired, but I will be providing those findings tonight.

One of those things was to send a comparative sampling, plustek120 vs. Nikon coolscan IV, but it will look exactly like the one Ebertoni has posted.

That's what my 120 looks like, the mounted slides are worse.

One possibilityt hat was offered was that some of us may have been shipped an early version of the film carriers.

more on that when I submit my findings and hear back from Plustek/silverfast

 

[hanskerensky]

Mounted slides will allways be a problem with a fixed focus scanner. The mounts vary in thickness and so the position of the filmplane !

Saw this happen with my Nikon LS IV ED which thanks to his autofocus corrected that.

 

[johnny.moped]

And seeing all these out-of-focus-problems I seriously doubt the great DOF the lens in this scanner is supposed to have.

 

[philipus]

Does anyone have access to both a 120 and, for instance, a Coolscan 8000 or 9000 and could post some comparisons? As a 9000 owner myself I looked to the 120 as a future replacement should my scanner break and Nikon refuse to service it. I think Bernhard (kanzlr) has one possibly? Or is this perhaps against the rules of the thread (apologies in that case).

 

[gbpost]

I received my Opticfilm 120 last Thursday in Germany. It seems to be from the second batch and it also has a defective 35 mm filmholder. I scanned a 35 mm negative in the 35 mm holder and the 6 x 4,5 cm holder, the difference in sharpness is obvious, see attachment. The eye in the picture is unsharp by intention, the film grain is more visible in areas where the image itself is not sharp.

I contacted Plustek Germany tonight and asked for replacement of the defective 35 mm film holder.

Happy scanning

Guido

 

[hanskerensky]

Ok, so just out of curiosity i measured the filmplane height of 3 holders on my measurement bench with a micrometer with 0.01mm resolution. Measured on the edge were the film rests on at the position of a T crossing because there the material has the most stifness.

Results when i take the 6x9 holder as reference :
6x9 Holder 0
35mm Holder +0.03mm
6x6 Holder +0.04mm

This is quite a good result and surely not the cause of the approx. 0.6 mm focus error that i experience.