Plustek 120 scanner

[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/plustek1...5F8E#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.