Plustek 120 scanner

[rustyair]

Looks like the plustek 120s were delivered to some houses but a comparison of highest rate of coolscan 9000ed and plustek 120 would be great!


plustek 120 sample links,


http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00ZpLQ?start=210

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stefan_df/

http://www.flickr.com/groups/plustek_opticfilm_120/pool/with/8370692651/#photo_8370692651

[SURF]

Yes. It looks like. No high resolution scans though. (4000-5300 dpi)

[lbenac]

Yes. It looks like. No high resolution scans though. (4000-5300 dpi)
How higher than 4000 or 5300 would you want to go :confused: ?
If the optical resolution is a "real" 5300 than it would be higher than the Nikon 8000/9000 and it is plenty.

Cheers,

Luc

[SURF]

Hi Luc,

5300 is enough. But in on the real films and not on a glass resolution target which is straight in the film holder cause in it is made of glass.

As for the samples have a look at that pair. Plustek is on the right upscaled to 4000 dpi from the sample. On the left is the scanner with real optical 5300 dpi downsized to 4000 dpi. It is not too much fair but gives an idea what to look at.

Cheers,
Al

[SURF]

I want to correct myself. I ment: no high resolution samples though. (4000-5300 dpi)

And I do not believe that the scanner rated 5300 dpi is usable without autofocus or glass holders. In a shipped configuration this scanner is a joke.

[Corran]

Wait, this scanner doesn't have autofocus??? At $2,000?

[lbenac]

Wait, this scanner doesn't have autofocus??? At $2,000?

Now that is a bummer. I will treasure my Coolscan 8000

[lbenac]

I want to correct myself. I ment: no high resolution samples though. (4000-5300 dpi)

And I do not believe that the scanner rated 5300 dpi is usable without autofocus or glass holders. In a shipped configuration this scanner is a joke.

Oh I see...
Agreed it seems very strange that there is no autofocus at this price range. And of course the 5300 optical resolution need to be verified independently. Even if it is on a best case scenario of a target.

[rustyair]

A review

http://retrolux.de/plustek-opticfilm-120-sample-scans#1

[SURF]

Wait, this scanner doesn't have autofocus??? At $2,000?
It is $1999.
They say there is no autofocus.

PS. I have no idea which sentence from above is a joke. :)

[Ivan J. Eberle]

You're slamming it without having seen or touched one yet? What, do you blog for a competitor? Who the hell cares whether it autofocuses if the scans are sharply focused or can be made so?

While I have AF on my Konica Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400, the manual focusing knob is what I've always used for critically focusing, every image. (To hit 100 lp/mm, it's really worth all the bother.)

[Corran]

Hmm, so I assumed it had no focusing at all, and if your film isn't in just the right place it simply wasn't in focus. Or does it have a focus knob of some sort? That would be something at least.

Either way I'm happy this scanner has come into the market but I'm certainly not plunking down $2k for one. I'd rather get a CoolScan 8000 for almost half used. We'll see where the used market stabilizes to on these.

[ericpmoss]

You're slamming it without having seen or touched one yet? What, do you blog for a competitor? Who the hell cares whether it autofocuses if the scans are sharply focused or can be made so?

While I have AF on my Konica Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400, the manual focusing knob is what I've always used for critically focusing, every image. (To hit 100 lp/mm, it's really worth all the bother.)

While I'd agree that trusting autofocus is foolish, my experience with a CoolScan 9000 and Silverfast is that it is useful as the first step in focusing manually. On negatives it usually gets it perfect or almost perfect, saving me a 5 minutes of hunting around.

[SURF]

Hmm, so I assumed it had no focusing at all

And I still do.

[rustyair]

Another review I found

http://www.fabioventura.com/plustek120/h53EF5F8E#h53ef5f8e

==

http://retrolux.de/plustek-opticfilm-120-sample-scans#1

And this guy is saying the optical dpi is 3900 and overall the difference in the scan results (Epson 4990 vs plustek 120) are so minimal that will return the scanner.

[Corran]

Considering the Epson's optical resolution is at best 2200 SPI or so, that's not a "minimal" difference???

[Preston]

I'm with Corran on this one: That's a big difference in optical resolution. Also, I've not seen a consumer-grade flatbed do as good a job on 120 scans as a dedicated 120 scanner.

--P

[Michael Graves]

When I look at the samples giving in both of the links provided by rustyair, I can clearly see a difference in the quality of the scans, even given the limitations of web display. The PlusTek is obviously superior. I can only assume that the actual scans seen up close and personal would reveal an even greater difference. What I think would be a valuable test is for someone with experience in scanning do a comparison. We have no way of knowing what level of experience the two reviewers in these links actually possess.

Secondly, I'd like more information on how focus can be adjusted on the PlusTek. If at all.

[EdSawyer]

no one has really done the test that matters yet: Nikon 9000 vs. Plustek 120. Sadly, I think the Plustek will not fare well in that test, from what has been shown so far.

[Michael Graves]

no one has really done the test that matters yet: Nikon 9000 vs. Plustek 120. Sadly, I think the Plustek will not fare well in that test, from what has been shown so far.

The test would be moot for most of us, considering that the 9000 can no longer be acquired. Not new, anyway.

[Cesar Barreto]

A friend of mine spent some time talking with those people at Photokina and also saw some actual scanning test with 120 film and he noticed that focus shifted a lot towards the boards, althought the reps didn't seem to care much about it.
So it seems that it delivers good resolution, but the masks doesn't provide film flatness and there was no way of adapting a glass sandwich, since it had no options for correting focus. At least, there wasn't by the time it was shown.
I managed to use a single AN glass pressing my panoramic 6x17 negatives on Epson masks, but even then the quality still stays far from what I get with Nikon 9000.

[adelorenzo]

The test would be moot for most of us, considering that the 9000 can no longer be acquired. Not new, anyway.

I see Coolscan 9000 tends to sell for upwards of $2000 used so it's definitely not any cheaper. The question remains if the Plustek can give a 10 year old scanner a run for its money.

[Corran]

Why does everyone forget the 8000? I've seen LS-8000's going for as low as $1,000 used, with all the film holders.

But hey, keep ignoring it until I pick up another one (sold my first one when I ditched MF but now I want it back!).

[EdSawyer]

Used is fine with me. The goal is to have the best tool, not the cheapest or newest. That is why the 9000 is the one to beat, and still relavent.

[pinup tragic]

The difference between the Nikon 8000 and the 9000 is cosmetic only? That is a good price for a little used or good condition item.
They are good but a little slow and noisy.. tika tika tika, i read with interest that some wet mount with them maybe that will happen with the plustek to get the most out of it

[EdSawyer]

more differences between 8000 and 9000 than just cosmetics, btw.

[Corran]

Isn't there like a slight difference in multi-coatings, making them all but the same? I don't think there is any real difference.

[Michael Graves]

The point if it being used has nothing to do with quality. My 1938 Wollensak 190mm gives me better images than my 180mm Fuji. The point is that for every one scanner that comes available, there are six people who want it. That has two effects. It drives the price up for the people bidding, so they wind up paying as much for a 10-year old used scanner without a warranty as they would a new one. With no assurance that it will last more than a couple of scans before it craps out. Secondly, the other five who DIDN'T win the bid are still without a scanner. A currently manufactured scanner is there for everyone who can afford it.

[gmikol]

Reviving this thread to find out if there's anyone else near the Portland, OR metro area who has one of these. I got mine in the first batch from B&H and my UPS driver said mine was the 3rd she had delivered that day. Looking to compare notes and results in person.

Thanks--

Greg

[Scott Davis]

Bumping this thread - has there been any more real-world use of this scanner since early this year? I'm happy enough with my Epson V750, and it will stick around for the future as I do have need of flatbed scanning of prints, but it would be nice to have something that does a better job if possible on medium format film.

[Oren Grad]

Search "Plustek 120" in the thread titles at RFF - there have been some discussions there, including bug reports / troubleshooting.

[Otto Seaman]

Yeah RFF is where the real pros hang out ;-p