Nikon scanners OTOH have a purpose designed Nikon lens that's capable of making full use of the 4000 ppi sensor resolution. If the scanner uses IR blemish removal, then naturally its sensor must also be sensitve to IR. Now a fluorescent tube puts out infrared from its ends, which can contaminate the scan. Many scanners use a fluorescent tube as their lighting source. The Plustek does deliver better quality than an Epson flatbed, and (without Silverfast AI) is good value fo money, but close to a drum scan - no way! The Plustek uses a cheap lens that simply can't resolve much above 3000 ppi. What's important in a scanner is the quality of its lens and lighting system. It matters not how many pixels its sensor outputs. Reflecta scanners are made by Primefilm/Pacific Image BTW. Except the Plustek was slower and gave poorer colour. It actually resolves no better than a much older Primefilm 3600 Pro3 that I also had.
The non-existent auto feed wasn't accidentally omitted, and it's widely acknowledged that the claimed 7200 ppi resolution is pure fantasy. It's exactly the same as its 7200I forerunner, and the model before that. At that price do you really think it's going to be top-end? The Plustek, without Silverfast AI software, costs about £150 ($200). "The only scanner better is a drum scanner." Results in tests between the 10M and 10T are so close (indeed neither is a 10k dpi scanner, but effectively they do reach good resolutions) that I'd opt for the cheaper and mechanically simpler 10T myself, if I'd buy today. However, I'm a bit hesitant about the 10M several user reports talk about unreliable automatic film forwarding, which is a bit the whole point about this more expensive model. These scanners do their job well, and certainly earn their place between the high-end market and the cheap low-resolution scanners. I never used the Plustek, so I can't comment on that, but the Reflecta I'd recommend over a Nikon at this point in time, simply because it can be had new, with warranty, and results are close enough. So I don't really agree with the conclusions above. I posted some comparison shots (all B&W, if needed I can add some E6 and C41 scans too) in this thread: Scanning 35mm B&W Big downside of the Nikon: only available second hand, and spare parts are getting increasingly hard to find, so you do take a risk with those.
SILVERFAST PLUSTEK 8200I NOT FOUND MANUAL
The manual forwarding on the Plustek or the Reflecta I use is a nuisance, but I can live with it. Yes, advantages to the Nikon are autofocus, and automatic forwarding of the film - but I found the latter also can easily become a pain once it does NOT detect the frames well, or when frame spacing is uneven, which is not uncommon with older cameras in need of some maintenance. I don't see the Nikon being near twice as good. The Nikons are generally seen as among the best consumer 35mm scanners, and second hand the Nikon will cost twice what I paid for a brand-new Reflecta. Actually, I've got a Nikon CoolScan V on loan to compare it to this (simple humble) scanner, and I must say: the Reflecta doesn't disappoint. Personally, I am perfectly happy with it. I have the Reflecta ProScan 7200, which is the previous generation and now replaced with the 10T model it's a fully manual model like the Plustek you mention. I think rather than spend several hundred on a new scanner, I'd personally be looking for a good used Nikon Coolscan, which has a proven track record, sharp optics and excellent reputation. The practically identically specified Primefilm XE sells for almost half the price of the Reflecta 10m. There's a review of the Reflecta 10m here. Or that the scan speed progresses at more than a snail's pace. I very much doubt that the optical system can match the claimed 10,000 ppi "resolution". Pacific Image scanners are generally good quality, but on the whole, filmscanner technology hasn't advanced significantly in the last 10 years. I believe the Reflecta is actually a rebadged Pacific Image Primefilm scanner.
The AI suffix simply means that the scanner is supplied with overpriced and underpowered silverfast software. You do realise that it has no auto film feed, and therefore scanning has to be fully attended and painfully slow? It was rubbish and I returned it for a refund after a few days. I used a supposedly "7200 dpi" predecessor of the Plustek 8200I. The two scanners are in a different league to each other.
0 kommentar(er)
