Old 05-03-2019   #41
ChipMcD
Registered User
 
ChipMcD is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by riccimar View Post
I contacted the European support and 120 PRO release don't seem so close

"OF 120 we already phase out and run out stocks there's no more in the market.
The OF120 Pro will not launch so quickly it will be around end of 2019 or 2020.
Thanks"
I got much the same information from using their "Contact" button. I did get a f/u offering a reconditioned OF 120 for $1,400. I wonder if the PRO will ever happen.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2019   #42
albireo
Registered User
 
albireo is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 41
I wish Nikon would just step in and show again how it's done. I'd be on a Coolscan 8500 in a heartbeat.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-2019   #43
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 8,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by albireo View Post
I wish Nikon would just step in and show again how it's done. I'd be on a Coolscan 8500 in a heartbeat.
They don't care. I had hope for the film digitizer mode on the D850, but that was seriously half baked. And then weirdly when they introduced the Z6/7 cameras, they don't even have that option.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2019   #44
kkcsm
Registered User
 
kkcsm is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Lenexa, KS
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Seems like a botched product launch. I know a few folks who have had to switch to other brands of scanners after they could not find any OpticFilm 120's. Really poor planning on Plustek's part.
Indeed...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2019   #45
mpaniagua
Registered User
 
mpaniagua's Avatar
 
mpaniagua is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
Age: 46
Posts: 1,104
It was kinda sad. Saved to get this scanner and eventually couldn't find it anywhere. For the time being, I'm using an Epson V600 that meets my current medium format needs.

I got a 35mm Plustek scanner and it works great by the way.


Marcelo
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2019   #46
Hogarth Ferguson
Registered User
 
Hogarth Ferguson's Avatar
 
Hogarth Ferguson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcsm View Post



Isn't this the opposite of the Osborne effect? Osborne announced a new product much better than their current product, leaving their current dead in the water as no one wanted it.



In this case, no one can find or buy the current plustek. Still, they did a horrible job here, but not the osborne effect.
__________________
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-28-2019   #47
kkcsm
Registered User
 
kkcsm is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Lenexa, KS
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogarth Ferguson View Post
Isn't this the opposite of the Osborne effect? Osborne announced a new product much better than their current product, leaving their current dead in the water as no one wanted it.



In this case, no one can find or buy the current plustek. Still, they did a horrible job here, but not the osborne effect.
They stopped making the old, announced the new and can’t deliver. Pretty close. Anyway, they have other products and I imagine the 120 will not make or break them.

I’ll continue with my v700 and hope someday they’ll deliver.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-04-2019   #48
hanskerensky
Registered User
 
hanskerensky's Avatar
 
hanskerensky is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Limburg, The Netherlands
Posts: 719
Well, last time after the introduction of the OF120 I had to wait for about 2 years until it was available. Let us asume it will now take 1 year that would indicate delivery in the autumn of this year.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my Flickr Collections!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2019   #49
hanskerensky
Registered User
 
hanskerensky's Avatar
 
hanskerensky is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Limburg, The Netherlands
Posts: 719
First Leaflet of the Pro is online :
http://downloads.plustek.com/downloa...32AE-00100.pdf
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my Flickr Collections!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #50
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanskerensky View Post
First Leaflet of the Pro is online :
http://downloads.plustek.com/downloa...32AE-00100.pdf
Wow. Very very disappointing. I see almost no improvements to the hardware. What is the point of this scanner?

Resolution: Same as the last model.
Color depth: Same as the last model.
Dynamic range: Same as the last model.
Lens: Same as the last model.
Software: Same as the last model.

This is unbelievable. The only apparent improvement is the switch to USB 3.0. Seriously? Here's what I would want to see:
* Add scanning of 6 x 17 format.
* Improved resolution.
* Improved dynamic range.
* Get rid of Silverfast, easily the worst piece of software I have ever encountered.

I see no reason at all to upgrade from the past model, even though I would if there was a compelling reason.

I have no idea what Plustek is trying to accomplish with this model. Their marketing literature makes no claim whatsoever of any improvements to the OpticFilm 120.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #51
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 44
Posts: 9,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Wow. Very very disappointing. I see almost no improvements to the hardware. What is the point of this scanner?

Resolution: Same as the last model.
Color depth: Same as the last model.
Dynamic range: Same as the last model.
Lens: Same as the last model.
Software: Same as the last model.

This is unbelievable. The only apparent improvement is the switch to USB 3.0. Seriously? Here's what I would want to see:
* Add scanning of 6 x 17 format.
* Improved resolution.
* Improved dynamic range.
* Get rid of Silverfast, easily the worst piece of software I have ever encountered.

I see no reason at all to upgrade from the past model, even though I would if there was a compelling reason.

I have no idea what Plustek is trying to accomplish with this model. Their marketing literature makes no claim whatsoever of any improvements to the OpticFilm 120.
Didn't the original one have a lot of reliability issues? Perhaps this one is simply a redesign that is supposed to fix the older one's problems.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #52
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
Didn't the original one have a lot of reliability issues? Perhaps this one is simply a redesign that is supposed to fix the older one's problems.

Mine has had zero reliability issues as I suspect most have. This scanner has been around for many years in its first version. Reliability issues would not have had to wait 5-6 years to get fixed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #53
Oren Grad
Registered User
 
Oren Grad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
What is the point of this scanner?
To exist and actually be available for purchase, filling a critical product niche that is otherwise empty.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #54
albireo
Registered User
 
albireo is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanskerensky View Post
First Leaflet of the Pro is online :
http://downloads.plustek.com/downloa...32AE-00100.pdf
Finally. Great news. If this delivers on the autofocus front and the price is right, it might be all that I'll ever need for 35mm and 120 work. Looking forward to reading a review on this as soon as it becomes available.

My cheap Plustek 7500i is a massive improvement in quality over the scans I was getting with my Epson flatbed on 35mm negatives. Still have the Epson flatbed, which I use for my 120 scans.

If this Plustek pro 120 improves my 120 flatbed scans by the same amount my old Plustek 7500i did on 35mm ones, it's a no brainer, really.

I will be able to:
-Ditch my Plustek 7500i and my Epson flatbed
-Avoid faffing around with dodgy repro-stand/DSLR-stitching scanning concoctions

Silverfast is a non issue for me - I use Vuescan professional on all of my scanners, would never bother using anything else.

Looking forward to more updates.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #55
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
To exist and actually be available for purchase, filling a critical product niche that is otherwise empty.

Why discontinue the previous model then?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #56
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by albireo View Post
Finally. Great news. If this delivers on the autofocus front

The published brochure makes no claim that this scanner has autofocus so I would assume then that it does not.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #57
Oren Grad
Registered User
 
Oren Grad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Why discontinue the previous model then?
Because they sold out their stock and, for whatever reason, weren't yet in a position to do another production run.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #58
albireo
Registered User
 
albireo is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
The published brochure makes no claim that this scanner has autofocus so I would assume then that it does not.
Well, these are the specs for the old Plustek 120

https://plustek.com/us/products/film...m-120/spec.php

Compared to the specs for the 120 Pro posted above, they lack the line

"lens calibration"

One can only hope.

Regardless, the Plustek 120 has been OOP for a while and I will not buy a used one because a) I can't find one anywhere and b) I don't trust the previous owners.

As someone else suggested, great to have a new product to fill a niche for those of us who don't own the old version.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #59
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by albireo View Post
Well, these are the specs for the old Plustek 120

https://plustek.com/us/products/film...m-120/spec.php

Compared to the specs for the 120 Pro posted above, they lack the line

"lens calibration"

One can only hope.

Regardless, the Plustek 120 has been OOP for a while and I will not buy a used one because a) I can't find one anywhere and b) I don't trust the previous owners.

As someone else suggested, great to have a new product to fill a niche for those of us who don't own the old version.

I saw that but seriously doubt that has anything to do with autofocus. Calibration ensures that the lens is properly set, but I would doubt that it moves to reflect the best focus for each individual shot to account for film flatness. Very doubtful.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #60
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
Because they sold out their stock and, for whatever reason, weren't yet in a position to do another production run.

Very likely. What gets me is that if they are going to do a new product, then damn well DO a new product! Go all out and makes some serious improvements. Like another poster said, autofocus! More resolution! Whatever. Make a truly new product. USB 3 is nice and all but hardly something that most people will notice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #61
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 44
Posts: 9,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
The published brochure makes no claim that this scanner has autofocus so I would assume then that it does not.

In the brochure one of the things in the spec list says: "Lens Calibration: Yes." I wonder i that means autofocus? or even manual focus?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #62
Mlehrman
Mlehrman
 
Mlehrman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 993
I've been using the 120 since close to it's introduction, and just left a detailed message with their Technical Support help number concerning "lens Calibration". Callback pending.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #63
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 8,389
Hmm, lens calibration? Scanning with a digicam does not need that. It uses AF to focus on the grain and works perfectly 100% of the time. With software like negativelabpro.com, I don't see the need for scanners and their headaches.
I was excited about the Plustek 120 years ago until I figured things out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #64
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Hmm, lens calibration? Scanning with a digicam does not need that. It uses AF to focus on the grain and works perfectly 100% of the time. With software like negativelabpro.com, I don't see the need for scanners and their headaches.
I was excited about the Plustek 120 years ago until I figured things out.

How long does it take you to "scan" 10 6x7 negatives from start to finish with your set up? And where does your final resolution top out at when you go for maximum level?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2019   #65
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 4,075
Using a DSLR is fine for viewing things on the web but it can't touch the raw output of a multiple pass scan from a dedicated negative scanner. A DSLR can't match the bit depth of what a negative scanner can do. The AF module of the camera focuses on the surface of the emulsion, not the grain. It doesn't have that resolution and it is mostly focusing on the acetate. Up close with the best AF macro lens you can find is still not good enough to pull out grain focusing because camera AF sensors don't have that resolution. They probably can't tell the difference between the thickness of one sheet of acetate and two. So you have a built in error which can be the whole film itself. If the camera had active IR AF, it might be able to get a little closer. Then you have the issue of vignetting because there are no true process lenses made which fit a DSLR and have AF. You're still better off focusing by eye. In a nutshell, scanning negatives that way is good enough for the web but if one is wed to a DSLR, it would be best to wet print then take the photo of the print itself. Far more detail is available that way.
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2019   #66
bjolester
Registered User
 
bjolester is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 233
https://blog.plustek.com/2019/11/13/...ce-award-2020/
__________________
Bjørn
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2019   #67
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 8,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
Using a DSLR is fine for viewing things on the web but it can't touch the raw output of a multiple pass scan from a dedicated negative scanner. A DSLR can't match the bit depth of what a negative scanner can do. The AF module of the camera focuses on the surface of the emulsion, not the grain. It doesn't have that resolution and it is mostly focusing on the acetate. Up close with the best AF macro lens you can find is still not good enough to pull out grain focusing because camera AF sensors don't have that resolution. They probably can't tell the difference between the thickness of one sheet of acetate and two. So you have a built in error which can be the whole film itself. If the camera had active IR AF, it might be able to get a little closer. Then you have the issue of vignetting because there are no true process lenses made which fit a DSLR and have AF. You're still better off focusing by eye. In a nutshell, scanning negatives that way is good enough for the web but if one is wed to a DSLR, it would be best to wet print then take the photo of the print itself. Far more detail is available that way.
Phil Forrest
And I disagree with you completely. I scan with a digicam - Nikon d850 and now Z7 - see none of the issues you mention and print and sell huge prints from them.
The only thing I’ve seen better is from drum scanning.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2019   #68
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 4,075
I don't doubt you have shown and sold prints from these scans, I'm just saying a DSLR cannot resolve microscopic film grain unless you're using a microscope. No macro lens/sensor combinations exist which can pull the detail of film grain. Without a microscope you don't have that resolution available that a good film scanner gives. You'd get closer if you could stick the film right to the sensor and scan it like a contact print but thats not a thing either
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2019   #69
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 44
Posts: 9,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
I don't doubt you have shown and sold prints from these scans, I'm just saying a DSLR cannot resolve microscopic film grain unless you're using a microscope. No macro lens/sensor combinations exist which can pull the detail of film grain. Without a microscope you don't have that resolution available that a good film scanner gives. You'd get closer if you could stick the film right to the sensor and scan it like a contact print but thats not a thing either
Phil Forrest



Scanners cannot resolve grain properly either, that's why scanned film suffers from grain aliasing that makes the image look grainier than it actually is.


I did a quick test a few weeks ago by photographing a 35mm black and white negative with my Olympus OM-d E-M1 mark II with the 60mm f2.8 Olympus Macro lens. This is a 20mp camera.


I then scanned the film with my Nikon LS-8000 scanner. I had the film in the glass neg carrier from my scanner for both the scan and the digital photo.


There was virtually no difference in resolution between the two images. When my scanner finally dies, I'll just 'scan' my 35mm negs with the OM-D E-M1mkII.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2019   #70
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 8,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
I don't doubt you have shown and sold prints from these scans, I'm just saying a DSLR cannot resolve microscopic film grain unless you're using a microscope. No macro lens/sensor combinations exist which can pull the detail of film grain. Without a microscope you don't have that resolution available that a good film scanner gives. You'd get closer if you could stick the film right to the sensor and scan it like a contact print but thats not a thing either
Phil Forrest
It focuses on the grain. It resolves the grain. The results are spectacular.


Have you tried scanning film with a FF high rez DSLR?

d850 set up and Nikon 60mm macro lens:

Full image:


1:1 enlargement from the middle left corner. You can see strands of hair on the lady's face in the foreground. And see detail everywhere:



And this is with Fuji C200, not some high end film. Hand held at low light as the sun had set.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2019   #71
Antares
Registered User
 
Antares is offline
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
I don't doubt you have shown and sold prints from these scans, I'm just saying a DSLR cannot resolve microscopic film grain unless you're using a microscope. No macro lens/sensor combinations exist which can pull the detail of film grain. Without a microscope you don't have that resolution available that a good film scanner gives. You'd get closer if you could stick the film right to the sensor and scan it like a contact print but thats not a thing either
Phil Forrest
You can have as much resolution as you want using a DSLR or mirrorless. You simply stitch as many images as you desire. That said, a state of the art DSLR or mirrorless sensor wipes the floor with any flatbed scanner...using one image. Dynamic range is superior as well in the DSLR or mirrorless setup...think 15 stops. As far as resolving grain, I use live view 20x magnification, and I focus manually **on the grain. **. The fact that i can see grain in the 20x live view is proof that the camera can resolve the grain.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-22-2019   #72
luuca
Registered User
 
luuca's Avatar
 
luuca is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: italy
Age: 44
Posts: 441
scan with a digicam is not an issue for quality results.
the (BIG) problem is the time needed to do this.
I usually setup my scanner in the evening with 2 strips of 35mm and then I go to bed, leaving the scanner to do its job.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2019   #73
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 8,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by luuca View Post
scan with a digicam is not an issue for quality results.
the (BIG) problem is the time needed to do this.
I usually setup my scanner in the evening with 2 strips of 35mm and then I go to bed, leaving the scanner to do its job.
It takes me 1/2 second per image. And I get pin sharp perfectly focused scans that are 8300x5500.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2019   #74
bjolester
Registered User
 
bjolester is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 233
"Camera scanning" of 35mm is much more convenient than with medium format film. Many people state that all you need to do is to take multiple shots of 120 film and use stitching. Having tried my best with getting good results from "camera scanning" of medium format film, I would much prefer to have a medium format film scanner. So I am looking forward to the Plustek OpticFilm 120 PRO, hoping it will be an improvement to the first generation Plustek OpticFilm 120 scanners.
__________________
Bjørn
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2019   #75
luuca
Registered User
 
luuca's Avatar
 
luuca is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: italy
Age: 44
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
It takes me 1/2 second per image. And I get pin sharp perfectly focused scans that are 8300x5500.
mmh I doubt about it. but kudos for you, I'm not as fast as you and I prefer to scan strips with a dedicated scanner (both 35 and 120)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2019   #76
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 8,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjolester View Post
"Camera scanning" of 35mm is much more convenient than with medium format film. Many people state that all you need to do is to take multiple shots of 120 film and use stitching. Having tried my best with getting good results from "camera scanning" of medium format film, I would much prefer to have a medium format film scanner. So I am looking forward to the Plustek OpticFilm 120 PRO, hoping it will be an improvement to the first generation Plustek OpticFilm 120 scanners.
I dont do any stitching. Using today’s hi rez ff cameras is waaay plenty.

The pic I posted above is an example of that. It is a pano shot which in essence makes it medium format on the long side. Single capture no stitching. I can print that huge.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-24-2019   #77
bjolester
Registered User
 
bjolester is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
I dont do any stitching. Using today’s hi rez ff cameras is waaay plenty.

The pic I posted above is an example of that. It is a pano shot which in essence makes it medium format on the long side. Single capture no stitching. I can print that huge.
I understand that the 45 mp Nikon D850 is very suitable for film duping. My main DSLR is a 16 mp Pentax K-5iis, consequently I have to use stitching when scanning medium format film, resulting in a very time consuming and cumbersome method. The Pentax K-5iis is a wonderful camera, no need for me to "upgrade". Therefore I am searching for a medium format film scanner, maybe a second hand Nikon or Minolta, or possibly wait and see how the new Plustek OpticFilm 120 PRO turns out when it materialises.
__________________
Bjørn
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2019   #78
Ted Striker
-
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 899
Vaporware.
  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 04:10.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.