Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 05-02-2012   #151
rawhead
Registered User
 
rawhead is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 62
So what does that mean? We won't see the scanner for another 2 years, and it may be retailed at $3500??

I'm really not sure that's good news.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #152
JayM
Registered User
 
JayM is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Age: 30
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawhead View Post
So what does that mean? We won't see the scanner for another 2 years, and it may be retailed at $3500??

I'm really not sure that's good news.
Chatter on their facebook page from their company man says "less than $3k for sure"
__________________
Show me your film leaders and I will tell you what you are.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #153
david.elliott
Registered User
 
david.elliott is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,572
3k is awfully expensive and will price out a huge number of people. :|
__________________
My Website - Rendered In Silver

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #154
nlubis
Registered User
 
nlubis's Avatar
 
nlubis is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by david.elliott View Post
3k is awfully expensive and will price out a huge number of people. :|
+1. I really want this to be affordable, and 2,999 would not help.
That's 250 rolls of 120 scanned and process by Precision Camera.
Nothing for a profesional's budget, big number for mere mortals.
*crossing fingers
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #155
hipsterdufus
Photographer?
 
hipsterdufus's Avatar
 
hipsterdufus is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ferndale, MI
Posts: 854
You're almost to a used M9 at that pricepoint ($3k). Whether the output of an M9 can equal that of scanned MF film is a topic of debate, but I would rather have the M9.
__________________
-Eric K.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #156
finguanzo
Registered User
 
finguanzo's Avatar
 
finguanzo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR
Posts: 671
No one said that its going to cost 3k, it was just a comment that 3k would be too much...
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #157
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by david.elliott View Post
3k is awfully expensive and will price out a huge number of people. :|
I would think that we would want a highly capable scanner and not one that duplicates what is already in the market. If so, don't you think that given the lack of such a scanner in the market, that a higher price might be justified? I would certainly want Plustek to make a good profit on such a scanner and I want them to sell enough to justify the continued production of this product. So, I suspect that the market will take care of the pricing. Perhaps high with occasional promotions. That usually takes care of a larger group of consumers.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #158
mijosc
Registered User
 
mijosc's Avatar
 
mijosc is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by david.elliott View Post
3k is awfully expensive and will price out a huge number of people. :|
Agreed. My V750 will have to be good enough for the near future.
__________________
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mjschomer/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #159
david.elliott
Registered User
 
david.elliott is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwcolor View Post
I would think that we would want a highly capable scanner and not one that duplicates what is already in the market. If so, don't you think that given the lack of such a scanner in the market, that a higher price might be justified? I would certainly want Plustek to make a good profit on such a scanner and I want them to sell enough to justify the continued production of this product. So, I suspect that the market will take care of the pricing. Perhaps high with occasional promotions. That usually takes care of a larger group of consumers.
I think plustek probably knows best how to price their product. They know the margins and all that good stuff. The pricing all really depends who their target audience is. Is the scanner very high end with a price tag to match? My guess is that at $3000, a majority of consumers would likely not purchase the product and would stay with epson flatbeds (or an equivalent). I know I would just stick with my v500. $3000 is a ton of money.

I never said that the price wouldn't match the scanner's capabilities. All I said is that a $3000 tag will price out a lot of people. And, it would.
__________________
My Website - Rendered In Silver

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #160
sandermarijn
Registered User
 
sandermarijn is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Leiden, NL
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by david.elliott View Post
I know I would just stick with my v500. $3000 is a ton of money.
The V500/600/700/750-series seems more than good enough to me for 120 film. Imagine how much film/chemistry/paper you can buy for 3k or just 2k!

What the market *really* needs is a good, affordable (400-600 euros/usd), dedicated 35mm scanner.

I can't believe nobody's making such a machine. Kodak would have been the perfect candidate. Would have been.

What are all those people "coming back to film" supposed to do with those tiny frames? Enlarge and print in the darkroom they no longer have?

Plustek, can you please give us a 35mm scanner as good as a Nikon but priced like a Plustek? Please? (Dreaming never hurts.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #161
wblynch
Registered User
 
wblynch is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 588
Well if the price is too high ($3,000 is too high) then they won't sell but a handful and it will have been all for nothing. Better to price it at $1,000 and sell tens of thousands.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #162
varjag
Eugene Zaikonnikov
 
varjag's Avatar
 
varjag is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bergen, Norway
Age: 37
Posts: 2,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandermarijn View Post
Plustek, can you please give us a 35mm scanner as good as a Nikon but priced like a Plustek? Please? (Dreaming never hurts.)
Have you actually used plustek 35mm scanners?
__________________
Eugene

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #163
rawhead
Registered User
 
rawhead is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 62
If they can't build a scanner that is better than the 9000ED, introduced to the market *eight* years ago, and not price it below $2,000, which I think is what the 9000ED retailed for back then, then methinks that's a problem.

If they can truly deliver something on par with the 9000ED, I'd personally be willing to shell out something close to $1500, but that would be it... much more than that, I'm sticking with my V700.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #164
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,216
I love 120 film because even scanned on my V700 it blows every other imaging system I have out of the water ... except possibly my Crown Graphic!

At $3000.00 I'd be staying with my Epson I think. They'd sell at $3000.00 but not in any serious quantity ... and don't forget that 120 film seems to have had a few options reduced over the last year or so and may continue down that path.
__________________
---------------------------
zenfolio

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #165
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 39
Posts: 6,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawhead View Post
If they can't build a scanner that is better than the 9000ED, introduced to the market *eight* years ago, and not price it below $2,000, which I think is what the 9000ED retailed for back then, then methinks that's a problem.

If they can truly deliver something on par with the 9000ED, I'd personally be willing to shell out something close to $1500, but that would be it... much more than that, I'm sticking with my V700.
THey aren't going to do that, though. We know what's going to happen. They're going to get greedy and price themselves out of the market. They'll see that every once in a while, someone sells one of the old Nikons for $4000 on eBay, and they'll think their scanner is worth the same. Problem is, it won't be a Nikon. It'll be plastic, not metal. It won't have the ED glass lens, but mark my words, it will cost at least $3500.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Like My Work on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #166
rawhead
Registered User
 
rawhead is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
I love 120 film because even scanned on my V700 it blows every other imaging system I have out of the water ... except possibly my Crown Graphic!

At $3000.00 I'd be staying with my Epson I think. They'd sell at $3000.00 but not in any serious quantity ... and don't forget that 120 film seems to have had a few options reduced over the last year or so and may continue down that path.

Good point. And if the availability of high-quality (i.e., higher than the Epson lineup) remains out of the hands of the masses, then that will only push more people out of MF film photography, meaning Plustek will be dealing with an ever dwindling market.

It really should be in their best interest to be aggressive with regards to pricing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #167
wblynch
Registered User
 
wblynch is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 588
It doesn't have to be better than a Nikon 9000, only better than an Epson v750.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2012   #168
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
It doesn't have to be better than a Nikon 9000, only better than an Epson v750.

I scanned some HP5+ recently with my V700 that I shot with my Pentax 67ii on a tripod and I was amazed at the detail. I wouldn't know how much better the Nikon is because I've never used one and I'm not about to pay the money to find out. I would love to see Plustek come up with an MF scanner that was better than my Epson and closer to the Nikon ... I'd be prepared to pay $2000.00 but that would be my limit.

There's a place in Oz that still has a couple of the Nikons in stock last time I checked ... close to $5000.00 though!
__________________
---------------------------
zenfolio

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-04-2012   #169
sandermarijn
Registered User
 
sandermarijn is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Leiden, NL
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by varjag View Post
Have you actually used plustek 35mm scanners?
No I haven't. I've only read the reviews. The Plusteks may be better than I think they are.

I own a Minolta Scan Dual III. Even with Vuescan and doing all the usual trickery (scan as positive, etc.), I don't seem to get results close to the Nikons.

Sorry for going off-topic.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2012   #170
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 507
A lot of the people who can afford the niche market of MF film these days will also both be able to afford, and also want a high-performing dedicated film scanner, priced accordingly. The market is already skewed towards low-end scanners, and now there's virtually nothing available between $700 and $16,000. That's an absurd situation.

I was lucky to get a 9000ED just before Nikon stopped production, and when that breaks, I don't want to have to buy an Imacon (for the price of a car) to replace it. People moaning about the price of the Plustek before it's even announced should go buy themselves an M9 instead.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2012   #171
karlori
Digital Refugee
 
karlori is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Croatia
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post
People moaning about the price of the Plustek before it's even announced should go buy themselves an M9 instead.
Best answer to the last page or two... Let plustek do the pricing and production, and let the customers worry if the price is acceptable to them or not... As you said, if you can afford a high end MF with accompanying glass and accessories and high quality film and development you can afford the scanner.
__________________
M3 DS with CZJ Sonnar 50 1.5 T (wartime LTM lens)
M3 SS with Canon 50 1.2 LTM
IIIc "stepper" with Elmar and Summar

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2012   #172
david.elliott
Registered User
 
david.elliott is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,572
The notion that because somebody does medium format photography, they must also be able to afford and desire a scanner in the $3000 range is absurd.

All those holga users out there and the people using any of the various inexpensive medium format systems available at keh must have thousands in discretionary cash lying around.

One can put together a medium format system for thousands less than a 35mm system. The reverse also holds true. Either system is as (in)expensive as one makes it.
__________________
My Website - Rendered In Silver

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2012   #173
karlori
Digital Refugee
 
karlori is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Croatia
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by david.elliott View Post
The notion that because somebody does medium format photography, they must also be able to afford and desire a scanner in the $3000 range is absurd.

All those holga users out there and the people using any of the various inexpensive medium format systems available at keh must have thousands in discretionary cash lying around.

One can put together a medium format system for thousands less than a 35mm system. The reverse also holds true. Either system is as (in)expensive as one makes it.
I was aiming at the crowd that does not want something low end but won't spend 1/5th of yearly income for an Imacon. Didn't want to put anyone down or exclude gear and people using them.
__________________
M3 DS with CZJ Sonnar 50 1.5 T (wartime LTM lens)
M3 SS with Canon 50 1.2 LTM
IIIc "stepper" with Elmar and Summar

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2012   #174
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 39
Posts: 6,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by karlori View Post
I was aiming at the crowd that does not want something low end but won't spend 1/5th of yearly income for an Imacon. Didn't want to put anyone down or exclude gear and people using them.
David wasn't responding to you, he was responding to mani, who said that it is 'absurd' that there are not many scanners costing more than $700, and that people who are complaining about the price of the Plustek should shut up and buy an M9. As David pointed out, that is absurd. I can't afford an M9, probably never will be able to buy a $7000 camera, but I have a Nikon scanner. I think guys like mani who think photographers are made of money should put their money where their big mouths are and buy M9s for us 'complainers'. Or shut up.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Like My Work on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2012   #175
rawhead
Registered User
 
rawhead is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 62
If the new scanner turns out to be leaps and bounds better than a 9000ED and were priced accordingly, there would be nothing to complain about (though I may not be able to afford it). However, if the best that they can do is match the quality, and then price gauge it so that it's just below the current, heavily inflated going prices of the 9000ED, then I don't care what anyone says, Imma gonna complain
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 16:34.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.