Plustek 120 vs Imacon X1

[Scott Davis]

I realize this is a bit of apples vs. housecats but has anyone out there tried both of these devices (Plustek Opticscan 120 and Flextight X1), and is the qualitative difference worth the 6x price factor between the two? I would like to get something that will do a better job with especially medium format film than my V750, as I'm doing a lot of it. I would greatly appreciate comments and feedback that are substantiated, as I have seen and heard before contradictory remarks that alternatingly the Imacon is a quantum improvement over the Epson and that it is only marginally better compared to a drum scan. Specification-wise the Plustek falls between the two, so depending on which way the results go, it would also be a nominal improvement if any over the Epson and therefore a waste of money or it could be good enough to be worth the money relative to the Imacon.

[Oren Grad]

Have you read the reviews here?

http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Films...tberichte.html

[Scott Davis]

I did read that. It was not exactly a hearty endorsement. I had seen similar comments before, mostly at the time the scanner was released and folks were having teething pains with getting it to connect with their computers. I was hoping that someone had real world experience using one since they have been around for a while now.

[Leszek Vogt]

I had a much higher expectations than the 120 delivered. Unless you go with reasonably priced (used ?) drum rig....the Imacon will always float on top ~ so much depends on the operator too. Your other option is a good condition Nikon 8000 or 9000, which will still give you better results than the Plustek 120. Just make sure you know a good place for support (first). Yes, the choices are v. thin.

Les

[richardman]

Medium Format? Get the LS-8000 or LS-9000, there is very little win even switch to an X1... It will be many times better than the V7x0.

[Daniel Stone]

Or, you could get an Epson V750 (and possibly the Aztek wet mount kit in addition), and use send out your absolute best negs/chromes for a properly made drum scan. That way you won't get the depreciation with purchasing a new X1, and you'll able to spread that amount of money over a very large timeframe. Heck, probably much less.

Use the Epson for rough proofing, and small print work. For larger prints and or shots where you want that extra degree of "wow factor" thrown into the mix, send out the film for a drum scan. Of course done by a good operator.

Just my 2¢ of course

-Dan

[angusparker]

If I have the. Plustek 120. It's not bad, better than the V750 for medium format but not better than my older Minolta Dimage. The difference is that it is supported by current hardware and software and is easier to use, plus it handles 6x12. But I second the other poster, if you can live with the Epson V750 output and occasionally send out for a drum scan you are probably ahead in the game. Haven't used the X1.

[Scott Davis]

I was thinking at this point of just living with my Epson V750 and saving my pennies until I find a really good deal on a used X1 or at least an 858.

[koh303]

You cannot expect a 2000$ product to preform any feat a 20K$ product does.
That said - the larger imacons will scan up to 5X7 (not the X1). So you are better comparing a 343 and the plustek. They are not that far apart in cost, but without a shadow of a doubt, and in all reality the imacon will always blow away any other scanner out there, not only because of the ability to scan raw files (3F), but also because of the way it works, there is just no comparing.

** EDIT: I just read the reviews on BH about the plustek and it seems to be using sliverfast (with all of its pitfalls) and has some issues of its own. Thats not to say the imacon is not without problems, and maintenance is not cheap - but flexcolor is one of the most powerful editing software in the world, and it is pretty much bullet proof.

[Scott Davis]

That said - the larger imacons will scan up to 5X7 (not the X1)

On the Filmscanner.info website they state that the X1 will scan 5x7 whereas the X5 does not. That would definitely be a factor for me as I shoot 5x7 and it would be nice to have a single device for scanning most of my film (I do shoot 6.5x8.5 and some other larger sizes - 5x12 and 14x17 - that no scanner really accommodates).