Any news on the new Plustek 120 scanner?

[mdruziak]

I know there are lots of questions about the date. As soon as I can share something I will. But I WILL NOT post an availability date until I am certain that date will be met. I don't want to mislead anyone.

[XFer]

Could you share some infos about "price range"?
For example:
"Price range will be $1500-$2000 excluding taxes" :-)
Or:
"Price range will be $2500-$3000 exluding taxes" :-(

Even a convoluted hint would do. ;-)

[Foto-factotum]

There is a much discussion on Plustek's facebook page on 27 April.
I copied this:

"Plustek Technology ‎Mário Venda Nova I spoke with our CTO a few weeks ago and he said our design goal was to build a better scanner than the Nikon 9000. We will not release this scanner until we are sure the image quality and reliability are where they need to be.
Yesterday at 1:48pm · Like · 4"


I cannot wait!

Regards

eugene

[rawhead]

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.

[JayM]

Originally Posted by rawhead

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"

[david.elliott]

3k is awfully expensive and will price out a huge number of people. :|

[nlubis]

Originally Posted by david.elliott

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

[hipsterdufus]

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.

[digitalintrigue]

Show me an M9 for $3k, I'd like to buy it!

[finguanzo]

No one said that its going to cost 3k, it was just a comment that 3k would be too much...

[bwcolor]

Originally Posted by david.elliott

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.

[mijosc]

Originally Posted by david.elliott

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.

[david.elliott]

Originally Posted by bwcolor

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.

[sandermarijn]

Originally Posted by david.elliott

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.)

[wblynch]

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.

[varjag]

Originally Posted by sandermarijn

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?

[rawhead]

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.

[Keith]

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.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Originally Posted by rawhead

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.

[rawhead]

Originally Posted by Keith

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.

[wblynch]

It doesn't have to be better than a Nikon 9000, only better than an Epson v750.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by wblynch

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!

[sandermarijn]

Originally Posted by varjag

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.

[mani]

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.

[karlori]

Originally Posted by mani

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.