The new Microtek scanner...

[Steven Barall]

Hello everyone. First let me say that I am not an employee of Microtek. I saw the new Microtek ArtixScan M1 scanner at the Photo Expo here in NYC yesterday. It replaces the f1800. They say the optical resolution is 4800 dpi. It uses the new film holders and includes a 6cm strip holder (hurray). It will cost $699 for the Pro version and there is a cheaper priced version that comes with less software. The Microtek website has all the specs and info.

They are showing a comparison of 35mm slides scanned on the M1 and on the Epson 750 and the difference is really very dramatic. The Microtek person told me that they even used two different 750s because they thought that the first one was broken because the difference was so great. The M1 has auto focus and you get to select the focus point on the film you are scanning. This feature he told me has been used in dedicated film scanners but never in an inexpensive flatbed and it seems to make a huge difference.

So there you go, more wood for the fire. Cheers all.

[Walter Calahan]

Far better to use a dedicated film scanner for 35mm and medium format than any flatbed scanner.

Look forward to learning more about this product. Thanks for the heads up. One can never have enough firewood. Grin.

[jetcode]

Far better to use a dedicated film scanner for 35mm and medium format than any flatbed scanner.

What do you think a dedicated film scanner is but a modified flatbed scanner without the glass trays? Can we burn some Oak now? The Pine isn't warm enough for the onset of winter.

[Steven Barall]

The Microtek guy told me that a dedicated film scanner is still better but to get a flatbed that is that good you have to spend thousands of dollars for something like a Creo. Also, Microtek no longer makes their 120 film scanner.

The new Microtek is on the way over on the boat right now and they should be in stores in a few weeks after they clear customs and get shipped.

[jetcode]

There is an ongoing discussion on flatbeds here

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=29120

[jotloob]

Steven

The reported results sound very interesting .
I have ordered my F1 about 2 weeks ago , to replace my 1800F , but the scanner will only be available at the end of this month . I am very excited to receive the F1 .
I envy you for the price .
My F1 with SILVER FAST AI STUDIO costs 1004 € here in Germany .

Regards Jürgen

[Kirk Gittings]

BTW, the Microtek M1 is finally really coming for those interested in new consumer machines. I saw it demoed yesterday and will have one to test in a few weeks. It looks very verey impressive but I suspect there are some software questions we will need to know a lot about. More when I actually have the machine in my hands. I can say that the film holders for 4x5 are a definite improvement over those in the 1800f, etc.

From Ted harris on a separate thread.

Besides auto focusing, a real improvement for a scanner in this price range would be a decent step motor which would allow the more effective use of SF multi exposure, multipass. To date the step motors in every sub $1000 scanner has been really crappy.

[Brian Ellis]

It would be very nice to have more information about the comparison they made with the 750, i.e. what software they used for the 750, what settings they used, what form the dramatic differences took, etc. etc. Also would be nice to see a comparison based on 4x5 film rather than 35mm since the 750 has never pretended to be very good for anything except web use or tiny prints with 35mm film. If they really did the best that could be done with the 750 using 4x5 film and saw differences on the order of magnitude implied here, and that were meaningful in the final print, I'd replace my 4990 with the Microtek in a heartbeat.

[sog1927]

I can hardly wait for Ted's review in VC (hint, hint).

[Kirk Gittings]

I would be very suspicious if the new Microtek showed dramatically apparent better resolution at this price point. I would need to know if the scanner was hiding some sharpening in the background processing as the Imacons did (do?).