Used Canon FS4000 or New Plustek

[Poppers]

Hi all

I'm looking for a scanner to scan my B&W film and colour negative. Not sure if to go for one of the older scanners or a new plustek. Opinions please. I'll be looking to make prints from the scans.

 

[btgc]

It depends on prices. If you can get used Canon for a song, go for it. If it costs eur300+ or so, I'd think twice.

 

[damien.murphy]

B&W, have a look at the Plustek 7400, identical to the Plustek 7600 which I found impressive, but the 7400 is cheaper as it does not have the infrared dust removal (which is useless for B&W negatives) that the 7600 has. Would imagine a 7400 could be had for €150- €200 and being a new scanner will have no potential baggage like a used one may have. Also believe the FS4000 produces very grainy/noisy scans, I believe, from reviews I read in the past.

 

[stompyq]

I think the FS4000 applies sharpening to the output images that is not user controllable. At least that's what my research seems to say. I would go with a plustek that does not have ICE (since you don't need it and it will be cheaper)

 

[cabbiinc]

I think the FS4000 applies sharpening to the output images that is not user controllable. At least that's what my research seems to say. I would go with a plustek that does not have ICE (since you don't need it and it will be cheaper)

As you can't really use the Canon software with most current OS's you'll have to use Vuescan. You can control all you want with it (and Vuescan will also work on the new Plustek as well).

Unless you're absolutely sure you won't be shooting any color film (or scanning your uncles slides, etc...) I would definitely consider the scanner with IR dust removal. It really is a time saver when it works properly. My FS4000US works wonderfully with IR dust removal. My HP flatbed, not so much.

Having said all that I'd lean towards the Plustek scanner. It's currently supported by the manufacturer and extra film holders can be bought. Two big negatives for the FS4000US. The Canon is a good scanner, but it's been a number of years since the last one was made.

 

[Poppers]

Thanks for the replies. I do shoot colour too so would like to have infrared dust removal for those occasions. Hopefully I can get the canon for £160ish.

The age is a concern but the true dpi of 4000 and canon lens is what attracts me. I'll be using view scan as I'm on a mac.

 

[thegman]

I have the Canon, it's good, but if I was to spend the money again, I'd get the Plustek. These Canons and Nikons are not getting any younger, and they seem a good bit bigger than the Plusteks too.

 

[willie_901]

I bought a Plustek. I use it with Vuescan. I like it.

 

[wblynch]

Buy new when you can so they keep making these things.

 

[Poppers]

Are the plusteks upto the scan quality of the canons.

 

[damien.murphy]

Are the plusteks upto the scan quality of the canons.

Haven't used a Canon, aside from a mediocre flatbed (8800) that I have, but having used a Plustek 7600 for a while, I can say I was quite impressed. Impressed enough to know that with it and film, I could get at least the equal of the files I got from my dslr. There's a few threads on the Plusteks here which I think highlight their qualities, with most being impressed with them. Obviously they're not Nikon Coolscan good, but then neither is the FS4000 from what I've read.

Also, unless you already own Vuescan, don't forget to factor in the additional cost when considering a used FS4000. Whatever you go with, enjoy. For my money (and not having used an FS4000), I would opt for the 7600SE, and see if you can get a good deal on one, seeing as you would prefer ICE. Would also echo the sentiment to support Plustek if you can, seeing as they are the only company who seems to have any sort of interest in providing decent scanners that aren't flatbeds to us enthusiasts 🙂

 

[XFer]

The Canon has some shortcomings: noisy shadows, grain "amplification" (aliasing), risk of posterization in the darkest tones.
Plus, it uses CCFL as a light source: CCFL lamps fade over time and you won't find replacements.
I'd go for a new Plustek.

 

[astro8]

I am in the same position as you Poppers. I went with the FS4000. From what I've seen, using it with Vuescan I think I can get more out of it than the Plustek. So my FS4000 is in the post.

 

[Poppers]

I am in the same position as you Poppers. I went with the FS4000. From what I've seen, using it with Vuescan I think I can get more out of it than the Plustek. So my FS4000 is in the post.

perhaps you can let me know how you get one when it arrives

 

[k__43]

I've got both .. the FS4000US scans slow. The resolution is better and I don't see that it emphasizes the grain stronger than the plustek.
The batch scanning is the killer feature for me.

I plan to modify that thing to LED source if the lamp dies and I don't get a replacement. Another one of my endless DIY projects

 

[lawrence]

Obviously they're not Nikon Coolscan good, but then neither is the FS4000 from what I've read.

I replaced a Nikon Coolscan IV with the FS4000US, which for my purposes is a better scanner. However, the FS4000US does not resolve any better than the Nikon (2900 DPI) according to my tests. Obviously it is not in the same league as the Coolscan 9000, for example.