Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Plustek Film Scanner  (Read 6635 times)
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7910



WWW
« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2010, 06:43:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: barryfitzgerald
Ersnt Plustek have had a number of models around for some time. The 7200 was the first one and it did not have infra-red dust/scratch removal. They still do a non "i" range so you look for that (and thus the IR which IMO is pretty much essential)
Silverfast has also changed a fair bit in performance since I started using it, now supports CPU's with more than one core. They've updated and improved the dust/scratch removal (and notably too) they added a Kodachrome profile for scans on the Plustek models added multi-scan/exposure as well.

Really it's a different beast since the first reviews came along on the software front and it shows in my real world experience. So to be honest I'm not overly interested in specs and tests. Neither did I buy it for the class leading 7200dpi scan resolution either..maybe some did but I know from experience such high resolutions are pointless for most 35mm scans (about half that would likely be a more common scan resolution)

And I did try a number of Nikon and Minolta scanners nearly went for a Minolta 5400 II Elite very nice scanner but I got scared off by both Nikon and Minolta leaving the scanner business (spare parts etc) Thus I think Plustek have a nice little market to themselves (almost) They don't use ICE either which might sound a con but you can use IRSRD with Kodachrome where ICE can have problems. So on balance I think Plustek can punch up fairly near to the guys who have now departed the scene..and also at a pretty good/fair outlay for a scanner. I def think they provide a better output for 35mm scans than a V700/V750 but of course if you scan larger formats the choice is already made for you.
I have an Epson 4990 which does quite nicely on 4x5" and 8x10" negs for me and adequately on 120/220, using either Silverfast or Vuescan. I also have a borrowed Nikon 5000 which I've been using (with Vuescan) for a great number of 35mm slides. When I have to return the Nikon (soon), I'll probably invest in a Plustek, since I still have a great many slides to do.

Eric


Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2830


« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2010, 04:21:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: barryfitzgerald
And I did try a number of Nikon and Minolta scanners nearly went for a Minolta 5400 II Elite very nice scanner but I got scared off by both Nikon and Minolta leaving the scanner business (spare parts etc) Thus I think Plustek have a nice little market to themselves (almost) They don't use ICE either which might sound a con but you can use IRSRD with Kodachrome where ICE can have problems. So on balance I think Plustek can punch up fairly near to the guys who have now departed the scene..and also at a pretty good/fair outlay for a scanner. I def think they provide a better output for 35mm scans than a V700/V750 but of course if you scan larger formats the choice is already made for you.

For 35mm I use the Nikon 8000. Often in the normal two strip film holder, in some cases wet mounted when the strips are too curved over the width. Its resolving power comes near the Nikon claimed resolution of 4000 PPI. The same scanner is used for MF on the wet mount holder. Sometimes with thin negatives I switch to the V700 + wet mounting. Any film size above that on the V700 and my graphic film to digital conversions were done on the different A3 scanners I had in time.

There are good tests of the V700 and V750 models. iPhoto has one and the forum discussion adds to the review. Going way more in depth than what this review and the comments on it show.

The Minolta 5400 II Elite with the optional Scanhancer light diffusor most likely is the 35mm scanner to beat, resolution wise. For all Nikons, Imacons, Plusteks, Canons, Epsons around.

Where I used "ICE" it was more as a generic term for infrared hardware + the software to create a dust and scratch mask. With wet mounting I use it sporadically and then only in its mildest setting. I use the Vuescan variant then.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

spectral plots of +100 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm


Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad