Plustek or Pacific Image?
Old 03-09-2015   #1
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
Plustek or Pacific Image?

I'm looking at both the Pacific Image Prime Film XA scanner and the Plustek 8200i. Are either one of these any good? Any preference?

I'm only interested in scanning 35mm negs, and hopefully making nice 11"x14" prints, if that's not asking too much of these scanners.

Any advice you can provide would be greatly appreciated!
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #2
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
I haven't had a chance to use both of them, but decided on the RPS 10 M (what the XA is called in Europe) because of the possibility to scan a whole roll.

My experience with the XA has been limited so far because the one that I got had vertical banding similar to what looks like a dead pixel line. I sent it back for exchange and am waiting for a new one.

Although the XA can batch scan, you will inevitably have to redo some rolls or strips sometimes because the machine is very poor at automatically detecting frames. But really this isn't a problem, since you can just redo the scan at night.

The results that I could get from it in the two days that I played with it, barring the vertical line, were pretty good. Film curling seemed to be a problem on certain strips more than others, probably due to the type of film used. It is definitely capable of producing scans that can bring out more detail than what lab technicians were getting out of scans made on the same negatives using Fuji Frontier or Noritsu scanners. But I cannot yet endorse the machine since I haven't used it enough to figure out all of its quirks and a workflow, etc.

I used it with Vuescan and CyberView, the manufacturer's software. Didn't try Silverfast. Vuescan works better if you start up first with CyberView. In the end, I found it much easier to tame the scanner with CyberView then with Vuescan, but those results are again, like I said, inconclusive.

The XA has manual focus, which ought to be a huge advantage, but I couldn't see any difference within the focus parameters allowed by Vuescan. Cyberview is completely AF only. Another RFF member who used the scanner with Silverfast told me that he didn't find the manual focus on that any better than the results available from CyberView, and finally after much effort, just settled on using CyberView overall.

I used to have a Nikon Coolscan LS-5000. The XA has some design details that surpass that scanner. If everything worked as it should, it would be better, but as it is, I don't think so.

I think that http://www.filmscanner.info/ thinks that the XA is no better than the previous 7200 Pro model, but that one is hard to get and priced almost the same here in Europe. Scandig claims much better results with Silverfast, but I am skeptical of a German scanner site pushing German software.

Whichever one you get, get it from a place with a generous return policy in case you get a lemon.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #3
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,098
Hi Vince,
I'm currently using the Plustek 8100 and recommend it. Its small and easy. I've had no problems with it, except the software it comes with (SilverFast) is horrible. Switched the Vuescan and haven't looked back.
No experience with the Pacific though, it might be fantastic?
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #4
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
Thanks for the replies -- yes, I've heard that the SilverFast isn't a great interface and that Vuescan is a better way to go.

Of course, the one number that jumps out at me is the '10,000 dpi optical resolution' that the Pacific Image claims -- not sure if it would actually give you that in practice.

Both scanners are priced about the same (around $450-$500), so perhaps it might be a tossup (BTW B&H is where I'd likely purchase it, and they are great about returns if there's an issue). But here is where I get a bit confused -- the Pacific Image PF120 Multi-Format scanner is $1400, and is capable of 3200 dpi and has a dynamic range of 3.6. The Prime Film XA is (supposedly) capable of 10,000 dpi and has a dynamic range of 4.2. So for the PF120, am I paying that extra $950 for the benefit of being able to scan medium format, or is it just a much better scanner than the Prime Film XA, even though the specs are supposedly lower?
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #5
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Lupo View Post
Thanks for the replies -- yes, I've heard that the SilverFast isn't a great interface and that Vuescan is a better way to go.

Of course, the one number that jumps out at me is the '10,000 dpi optical resolution' that the Pacific Image claims -- not sure if it would actually give you that in practice.

Both scanners are priced about the same (around $450-$500), so perhaps it might be a tossup (BTW B&H is where I'd likely purchase it, and they are great about returns if there's an issue). But here is where I get a bit confused -- the Pacific Image PF120 Multi-Format scanner is $1400, and is capable of 3200 dpi and has a dynamic range of 3.6. The Prime Film XA is (supposedly) capable of 10,000 dpi and has a dynamic range of 4.2. So for the PF120, am I paying that extra $950 for the benefit of being able to scan medium format, or is it just a much better scanner than the Prime Film XA, even though the specs are supposedly lower?
The 10,000 dpi on the XA is BS. It probably has an effective max of 3,900 dpi, but in order to get that you will have to scan at max resolution and then downsize the huge files. IN general, on any of these scanners, you will always get a better scan by scanning at the max possible and then downsizing. This is not according to my own testing, but I am persuaded by what others have done and shown (some in fact are here on RFF). But for doing just a quick contact sheet, the batch scans in lower resolution mode on the XA are incredibly fast and easy.

The D-Max on the XA (4.2) is really good--noticeably better than what the lab gives you with those Fuji/Nortisu scans of 135.

The PF120 was reviewed quite favorably on the review linked in my last post, but it is not as good for 135 as other options. It might be better, IMHO, to get a dedicated 135 scanner, and then figure out a dedicated 120 option, either an Epson flatbed with all the aftermarket stuff, or a used Coolscan 8000, if you've got the courage to buy a unit that is no longer serviceable (from what I've heard).

Silverfast has recently had a UI update, hasn't it? It might be a lot more user-friendly now. But it's awfully expensive. I think that you can download a trial version once you decide on your hardware.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #6
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
No experience with the Pacific though, it might be fantastic?
Hey Michael,

Sounds like a viable option.
The big difference I think comes with the batch scan capability of the XA. If that's not important, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to pay the extra $$$. I've heard of quality issues with scanners from both makers--in fact, a lot more quality issues than is good for sound sleep at night.

I just pray that a really reliable excellent 135 scanner eventually comes one day into production...

Cheers,
Jon
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #7
Filzkoeter
stray dog
 
Filzkoeter's Avatar
 
Filzkoeter is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin - Germany
Age: 33
Posts: 415
I use the cheaper version of the Plustek 8200i, the 8100. Main difference: the 8100 has no ICE and it's cheaper (1/2 of the cost). Otherwise it's the same scanner.

It's a great scanner, I love it. It's capable of real ~4000dpi (you have to scan at 7200dpi and downsize). But the difference between scanning at 3600dpi and 7200dpi is not really big and get's to 99% lost after downsizing (but scanning at 3600dpi is more then twice as fast).

It comes with bundled Silverfast... it's okay, but I'm using Vuescan.


EDIT: the 7200dpi setting is as far as I know not interpolated... so in theory the scanner is capable of real 7200dpi... in practice the optics only max out at around 4000.
__________________
-Miko

- flickr -
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #8
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
So are you guys making prints with these scans? If so, are they capable of comparing favorably to a darkroom print?
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #9
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
I have to say a big thanks to our friend Miko (Filzkoeter) here -- he sent me a full-sized 7200 dpi scan from his 8100. No adjustments, no sharpening, no nothing. Just straight from the scanner.

I printed it straight from the online link he sent me on 13"x19" Exhibition Fiber paper with my Epson 3880 (the image pretty well filled the entire sheet). Very nice! The image had that kind of 'soft sharpness' that one might expect to see from an ISO 400 35mm negative printed at this size, and the grain looked like real grain, and generally pretty darned good!

So maybe the Plustek is the way to go.
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #10
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
 
rhl-oregon's Avatar
 
rhl-oregon is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,014
Vince, I just bought an 8200 from Adorama's eekBay store for $315, compared to their $299 8100. NIB, returnable, etc. It'll be mostly for BW, but paying a slight premium for the occasional infatuation with Ektar seemed sensible. I studied the RFF threads on this extensively, being a timorous miser, and testimony is mostly positive for Plustek for 135, and find a different solution for 120. My friendly one-person lab uses a Plustek for 135, and an Epson 750 / liquid mount for 120 and beyond. He was in the one-hour development biz for many years, and I trust his experience.
__________________
Robert Hill Long
Southern Pines, North Carolina USA


http://rhl.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2015   #11
jschrader
Registered User
 
jschrader's Avatar
 
jschrader is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 299
Talking

I have a Reflecta RPS 7200, which is obviously the Pacific Imaging in Europe.

I am OK with the quality. You can see the grain (Delta 400 in D76, so not too much grain), and more resolution is not needed (I scan at 3.600 dpi).
I have been printing up to A3+ (~12 by 18'') and that is fine.

What I am not happy about is that the transport is not reliable. It should be able to transport frame by frame, but this works rarely. So typically, I scan either frame by frame (then, I can easily adjust manually) or I let it work automatically ("scan all") when I am sitting by the scanner. When I hear it transporting, I quickly check and correct, if needed.

(I do not shoot much, just hobby; so I do not need the perfect workfolw. Which surely do not have )
__________________
J"rgen
----------------------
M6/35mm, D700 / FE / F2 / F
  Reply With Quote

A quick follow up
Old 03-12-2015   #12
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
A quick follow up

I received the replacement XA (RPS 10 M in Europe) today.
Initial use suggests it's a peach.
Batch scanning so far has been easy. Framing, no problemo.
No dead pixel lines or other banding that I can see, but it is still early.
I downloaded a demo of Silverfast SE Plus 8. Manifestly better than either Vuescan or CyberView X for this particular unit. The manual focus tool is very useful, and it really works compared to the stunted functionality of manual focus in Vuescan (completely non-existent in CyberView).
Costly, but I expect to purchase a key.

The XA has been tested capable of effective 4300dpi and a 4.2 Dmax.
High quality when needed plus batch scanning capability looks to make this a suitable solution for home use.

I made enough to buy a couple of really nice lenses by selling my Nikon Cooslcan LS-5000 and trading it for the XA, but some of that will go to buying Silverfast. The best thing is that as Nikon's service for the Coolscans fades into history, the Reflect RPS 10 M (Pacific Image XA) is new, under warranty, and serviceable if needed.

Hopefully the good news will continue.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2015   #13
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,109
I have the Plustek 8200ai. Nice scanner and works better than my Epson for 35mm. It is slow though and only scans one frame at a time. If you are not in a big rush it is great.

Silverfast isn't that bad. I prefer Epson's UI to any of them, but once you get used to it Silverfast works fine.

Can't compare it with the Pacific Image as I don't use it.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2015   #14
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
Right now it's still a tossup -- I am tempted by that 4.2 Dmax that the XA provides, but I'm also swayed by the generally favourable comments about the 8200ai that I've read here and elsewhere. So I'm back on the fence!

Just to confirm -- the Pacific Image doesn't use a 'film holder', does it? You just feed the negative strip right into the scanner, right?
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2015   #15
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Lupo View Post
Right now it's still a tossup -- I am tempted by that 4.2 Dmax that the XA provides, but I'm also swayed by the generally favourable comments about the 8200ai that I've read here and elsewhere. So I'm back on the fence!

Just to confirm -- the Pacific Image doesn't use a 'film holder', does it? You just feed the negative strip right into the scanner, right?
No film holder required, Vince.

I would just repeat that the manual focus capability of the XA used with Silverfast puts it *way* ahead of the curve.

Batch scanning is huge plus, too.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2015   #16
Joe Vitessa
Registered User
 
Joe Vitessa's Avatar
 
Joe Vitessa is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by noimmunity View Post
No film holder required, Vince.

I would just repeat that the manual focus capability of the XA used with Silverfast puts it *way* ahead of the curve.

Batch scanning is huge plus, too.
The batch scanning makes this scanner more attractive than the Plustek for me, but many reviews state it doesn't actually work. Or work well.

It's a tough call...
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2015   #17
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Vitessa View Post
The batch scanning makes this scanner more attractive than the Plustek for me, but many reviews state it doesn't actually work. Or work well.

It's a tough call...
Yes, I've seen those, too.

I've also seen a lot of comments about how Silverfast is a nightmare, as well. But in the first hours of using the software on this machine, I can say that the results it has given me are MUCH better than what Vuescan and CyberView can give, solely because of the manual focus function.

With the Nikon Coolscan LS-5000, I always used Vuescan, and learned how to use it well. I've only had the XA for a very short time, so it is really too early to reach any definitive conclusions, but what I've seen so far has convinced me that I must eventually pay the price and buy a licensed copy of Silverfast (I'm only using a demo version right now).

I will say that the first machine I had (returned last week; see above) was not as smooth in use as the one I just received today. Batch scan framing on the new one has been fine.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2015   #18
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Lupo View Post
Right now it's still a tossup -- I am tempted by that 4.2 Dmax that the XA provides, but I'm also swayed by the generally favourable comments about the 8200ai that I've read here and elsewhere. So I'm back on the fence!

Just to confirm -- the Pacific Image doesn't use a 'film holder', does it? You just feed the negative strip right into the scanner, right?
Hi Vince,

I'd be wary of the claims they all make. Like Filzkoeter says, the Plustek claim 7200 dpi, but it really maxes out at ~4000. I find it better (less artefacts) at 3600 dpi. I fear the same about quoted Dmax values, which probably only comes into play if you are shooting slide film - I've never run into a Dmax limit scanning B&W on my 8100. AFAIK they're all using similar tech in the guts.

I think it may come down to batch vs no batch and if that matters. I average 1-2 rolls a week, and preview then all, but only actually scan the good ones (maybe 10%). I don't want to batch as I don't want to have the junk on my computer. I probably spend 30 min per roll (with a beer or glass of wine) in the evening per roll. Its quite relaxing.

Good luck with your choice.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

The advantage of Manual Focus
Old 03-12-2015   #19
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
The advantage of Manual Focus

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
I think it may come down to batch vs no batch and if that matters.
Let's reconsider that statement.

I'm reluctant to make definitive statements because it is so early in my use of the RPS 10 M (XA), but I'll share some preliminary findings.

Here are two scans of the same frame. The first is done by Silverfast SE Plus in demo mode, using manual focus. The second is done in Vuescan Pro using auto focus. Why use manual on one and auto on the other? Apples to oranges, you will say. The reason is because Vuescan's manual function only allows adjustment across a 2mm range, while Silverfast allows it over a 3mm range. In my preliminary testing, the Vuescan range is not sufficient for this scanner. To be fairer to Vuescan, I probably should show comparisons of MF and AF both using Silverfast, and then Vuescan, but I didn't save the results. (I only saved what were the best results from each software within the limitations of my experience and knowledge about each).


Silverfast MF Full Image
by areality4all, on Flickr


VueScan Pro AF Full Image
by areality4all, on Flickr

Here are two crops. Silverfast has internal profiles for Delta 400, which I used. On Vuescan, I made a scan as flat as possible, and added work in LR. Besides contrast and clarity sliders, the sharpening slider was also used on the Vuescan image, whereas none was applied on the Silverfast image.



Autofocus VueScan crop
by areality4all, on Flickr


Manual Focus Silverfast crop
by areality4all, on Flickr

By the way, that restaurant in Tainan, Taiwan, is famous for it's "Wah-gwhey" (Hokkienese pronunciation), a local delicacy of rice porridge steamed with pork fat and other goodies.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #20
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,098
Interesting, I would like to see the VS autofocus results.
On the other hand, I've never had an issue with sharpness on the Plustek, the holder keeps on pretty steady. Do you have access to a Plustek (or another scanner) and of course time and the will to do further comparisons?
The other side of the coin is of course if you need/want batch scanning then the choice is obvious, regardless of focus.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #21
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
Interesting, I would like to see the VS autofocus results.
The image above from VS is autofocus, so I guess that you must mean manual focus. I need to finish a couple of articles that have deadlines, but your suggestion sounds like a fun project, so I'll try to do it as soon as I have a real break.

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
On the other hand, I've never had an issue with sharpness on the Plustek, the holder keeps on pretty steady. Do you have access to a Plustek (or another scanner) and of course time and the will to do further comparisons?
I don't have access here to any Plustek models, and, in any case, I don't have the stomach to do that kind of comparison, which could lead to all kinds of consumer wars. LOL! But your idea is totally legitimate, and I'm sure that eventually somebody else with access to both will do that. Of course, we could refer to the tests done at http://www.filmscanner.info/FilmscannerRangliste.html , which show results that rank the XA significantly ahead of the Plustek models, but one could always suspect different sources of different biases.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #22
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
I don't think that batch scanning is the make-or-break for me. Like Michael, I'll probably shoot 1-2 rolls per week (hopefully!) and will scan only those photos that I think are to my liking. For me, what it comes down to is which scanner produces the best scans for making 11"x14" prints, and which scanner is going to last for a few years without causing me ongoing issues.
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #23
Red John
Registered User
 
Red John is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Spain
Posts: 4
I have since 2012 the Plustek 8200i and am happy with it. This scanner is the same model as the Plustek 7600, but with Silverfast 8.

Reflecta scanners often have many problems over time. This is something that can be read through the forums. The Plustek 8200i is a proven scanner and a safe purchase.

There is a group on flickr dedicated to this scanner where one can take a look of what it offers in terms of quality scan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #24
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John View Post
There is a group on flickr dedicated to this scanner where one can take a look of what it offers in terms of quality scan.
Just checked out that Flickr link, and unfortunately the 10 or so shots that I checked out there don't particularly blow me away in terms of scan quality. May possibly be due to simply looking at web-res quality.
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #25
Solinar
Analog Preferred
 
Solinar's Avatar
 
Solinar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 2,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Lupo View Post
Just checked out that Flickr link, and unfortunately the 10 or so shots that I checked out there don't particularly blow me away in terms of scan quality. May possibly be due to simply looking at web-res quality.
Click on some of the images in the 8200i review at the link below:

http://www.frontallobbings.com/2013/...0i-review.html

My guess is that they were scanned at 7200 dpi and saved at a resolution of 3600 dpi.
__________________
- Andrew in Austin, Texas -

35mm Gear Bessa R, Leica II, - IIIg, - M2
Just for fun 35mm Gear a Kodak Retina II, Retina IIa, a Rollei 35 S, plus an Oly 35RD and XA
Modern Medium Format Fuji GW 690III
Vintage MF Folders a Voigtländer Perkeo II and Bessa II, 2 of them - a ZI Mess Ikonta 524/2 - plus an Agfa Super Isolette & a Record III
Digital a D300 and a D700 with some primes - still going over a decade later

"Who spilled the Dektol on the bathroom carpet?"
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2015   #26
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John View Post
Reflecta scanners often have many problems over time.
So do Nikon ones.
If durability were my primary concern, I would definitely consider a Pakon F135+.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John View Post
This is something that can be read through the forums. The Plustek 8200i is a proven scanner and a safe purchase.
Actually, one of the reasons that tipped my decision towards the Reflecta RPS 10 M was because of private correspondance with a member who had had access to both machines. But to be honest, as soon as my first Reflecta delivered a week ago turned out to be defective, I instantly knew that I would gladly take a Plustek model if the second example of the Reflecta had some problems, too.

As to what conclusive message can be gleaned from "the forums": What I've seen is that scanners from all makers have quirks, problems, and niggles, and that the only "safe purchase" is the one covered by warranty. Other than that, I don't think that the forums bear out any conclusive evidence about which is definitively better. Even the authoritative tests done by http://www.filmscanner.info/FilmscannerRangliste.html that show the Reflecta ranking well ahead of the Plustek do not cover all possible parameters for making a reasoned decision. The only other conclusion that I've garnered perusing on-line discussions and evaluations, is that many often look at gear in terms of "winning and losing", which to my mind is a REALLY big distraction from photography.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-26-2015   #27
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
Well I took the plunge -- the Plustek 8200i. Believe it or not, I did initially order the Pacific Image scanner, and I got it two days ago. However, it seemed so 'buggie' and the automatic loading was so finicky, that I gave up in frustration and sent it back (if I was having issues right off the bat, I couldn't see myself enduring two more years of it). The Plustek arrived today, and already I like it infinitely better than the PrimeFilm. Plus, I might be some kind of weirdo, but I actually like the SilverFast software (I do also have the Vuescan software, so at least I have the possibility of switching if I so choose). I'm one of those people who likes all the options, and after having only worked with it for 10 minutes, it seems pretty straightforward.

I'll try to post some scanning results once I get the hang of all the options, but for now I'm a happy camper. Many thanks for all who weighed in here.
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-26-2015   #28
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
First scan!


Elijah by Vince.Lupo, on Flickr

So now let me ask -- what's the deal with 'wet' scanning? Is that to reduce dust and scratches, much like 'nose grease' in the darkroom? If so, what is the 'wet' scanning liquid that you use? Is it wise to use it with the Plustek?
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2015   #29
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
Really liking this scanner!


Untitled by Vince.Lupo, on Flickr
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2015   #30
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
 
sebastel's Avatar
 
sebastel is online now
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: highdelberg
Posts: 1,135
looks good.
i had a "what if" moment - what if my LS-50 does not survive my next move (moving back to germany)?

this thread came in time ...
__________________

si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2015   #31
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,098
Glad you like it Vince. It's pretty painless isn't it?
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2015   #32
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
It's working out quite well, and I am actually liking the SilverFast software. Yes there are a lot of adjustments that one needs to consider with that software, but some of it you don't necessarily need to readjust from neg to neg, and I think it gives the user a lot of control. It's not at all hard to work with.
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2015   #33
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Lupo View Post
It's working out quite well, and I am actually liking the SilverFast software. Yes there are a lot of adjustments that one needs to consider with that software, but some of it you don't necessarily need to readjust from neg to neg, and I think it gives the user a lot of control. It's not at all hard to work with.
Hey Vince, glad to hear that things are working out for you, finally! The second image that you posted looks very well scanned.

I don't understand the part in an earlier post about the finicky auto loading on the XA. I load it up, then do a manual spacing adjustment on the first frame. (But I did have problems with my first unit, as I had mentioned earlier in the thread. Second one is peachy).

The great strength of Silverfast in my preliminary usage is a MUCH better implementation of manual focus.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2015   #34
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
I think one of the issues I was having was with some negs that were slightly curved (it didn't like that), and that it tended to overshoot the frame, and then when you pushed 'reverse' it would overshoot it again and so forth. After going through that about a half-dozen times I finally threw in the towel and sent it back. I determined that I really don't need the batch-scanning option, and the Plustek is better for my particular workflow. So that's about the way it turned out, in a nutshell.
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2015   #35
KEH
Registered User
 
KEH's Avatar
 
KEH is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 654
Hi Vince,

I bought the Plustek 8200i / Siverfast 8 SE bundle just about the time you started this thread. I had a Nikon 35mm scanner years ago, but found the autofeed very prone to framing errors. So the manual film holder approach is a step forward for me.

Using the USAF scanner target, I concluded that the Plustek produces a max resolution of about 4000 ppi. That's really very usable for prints up to 18" wide.

For my film work, I shoot BW exclusively. In terms of workflow, I have settled on using Silverfast to save a '16 bit HDR' image (in their terminology). This a straight scan of the negative, with no processing (other than setting a Gamma of 2.2 in the options). The result requires some work in post, but the big advantage is that you have a 16 bit grayscale file to work with - which gives you 65,536 levels of gray. So you can push the file very hard. The results are very satisfying.

If you don't go the HDR approach, then what is saved is an 8 bit grayscale file. This limits your post-processing options.

I tend to scan only the best few from a roll of film, so this labour-intensive workflow makes sense for my purposes. YMMV.

Cheers,
Kirk
__________________
My Gallery
My other galleries
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2015   #36
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by KEH View Post
Hi Vince,

I bought the Plustek 8200i / Siverfast 8 SE bundle just about the time you started this thread. I had a Nikon 35mm scanner years ago, but found the autofeed very prone to framing errors. So the manual film holder approach is a step forward for me.

Using the USAF scanner target, I concluded that the Plustek produces a max resolution of about 4000 ppi. That's really very usable for prints up to 18" wide.

For my film work, I shoot BW exclusively. In terms of workflow, I have settled on using Silverfast to save a '16 bit HDR' image (in their terminology). This a straight scan of the negative, with no processing (other than setting a Gamma of 2.2 in the options). The result requires some work in post, but the big advantage is that you have a 16 bit grayscale file to work with - which gives you 65,536 levels of gray. So you can push the file very hard. The results are very satisfying.

If you don't go the HDR approach, then what is saved is an 8 bit grayscale file. This limits your post-processing options.

I tend to scan only the best few from a roll of film, so this labour-intensive workflow makes sense for my purposes. YMMV.

Cheers,
Kirk
Kirk, just a question about Silverfast. In order to use the 16 bit HDR file, I thought that it was necessary to do the conversion in Silverfast HDR 8 (a separate application). Does that come with Silverfast 8 SE Plus? If not, how are you making the conversion?
Jon

(I started a separate thread to discuss my experience with the Pacific Imaging XA).
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2015   #37
KEH
Registered User
 
KEH's Avatar
 
KEH is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 654
Jon,

What the HDR scan does is just send a raw scan of the negative to disk. So you have to open the resulting file in PhotoShop, invert the image, set it to Gamma 2.2 using an exposure layer (if you forgot to do that at scan time), then use a levels layer to 'spread' the histogram. At that point you have a rather bright positive to work with. This all works fine because you have 65,536 levels of gray to work with.

The silverfast HDR application, as far as I can tell, takes the same input file and lets you apply the standard set of Silverfast image adjustments (including the NegFix conversion) after the fact.

Again, my workflow only works for BW - you really need the NegFix magic for colour negs because the films are so hugely variable in their characteristics.

Cheers,
Kirk

Quote:
Originally Posted by noimmunity View Post
Kirk, just a question about Silverfast. In order to use the 16 bit HDR file, I thought that it was necessary to do the conversion in Silverfast HDR 8 (a separate application). Does that come with Silverfast 8 SE Plus? If not, how are you making the conversion?
Jon

(I started a separate thread to discuss my experience with the Pacific Imaging XA).
__________________
My Gallery
My other galleries
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2015   #38
noimmunity
scratch my niche
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 56
Posts: 3,113
Thanks, Kirk. I tried that out and it works well. Good to know in case I decide to get Silverfast. In my demo testing, it can be much easier with certain B&W negatives to manual focus using Silverfast as opposed to Vuescan. Awesome.
__________________
jon 小強


flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-2015   #39
Vince Lupo
Registered User
 
Vince Lupo's Avatar
 
Vince Lupo is online now
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,369
I've been using Vuescan lately, and I'm trying to figure out which settings will give me the best result for b+w negs.

I am currently saving them as RAW files (dng), and I've tried both the 48-bit RGB and the 64-bit RGBI settings. Is there in fact a difference? Or should I be trying another, better option?
__________________
Check Out Our Redesigned Website! http://www.directiononeinc.com

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/direction-one-inc/sets/

'Mapping the West' - Named as one of the Best Photo Exhibits of 2016 by the Washington City Paper: http://www.directiononeinc.com/mapping-the-west/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2015   #40
tonyw3026
Registered User
 
tonyw3026 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1
I found this thread during a Google search and I happened to be considering the exact same two scanners - Pacific Image Prime Film XA scanner or Plustek 8200i Ai. I wonder if anyone could provide an update on their experience.

I have come to the conclusion that the main issue is reliability. I believe either scanner will do the job for me but how reliable have they been?

Also where were they purchased and what is your experience with the way returns and exchanges were handled.

Thanks
Tony
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 03:35.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.