Opinions: Best Under-$1000 35mm Scanner?

The Difference between the 7600i Ai and SE

The Difference between the 7600i Ai and SE

Rob,

I am the marketing guy at Plustek.

The difference between the Ai and SE versions of the scanner is the software. They use SilverFast Ai Studio and SE. The Ai also comes with an IT8 calibration slide to help color calibrate your scanner.

You can check the SilverFast site for exact differences. Ai gives you much more control over image adjustments. SE give gives you some control but is easier to use. I often say the differences between these to software versions is like the difference between Photoshop and Elements.

I'd also like to know more about your project. If you wind up using the Plustek for a published book, I'd like to talk to you about how we can help each other. Send me a PM please?

Mark
 
Rob,

I have had the pleasure to use a Coolscan 9000 for a while and the results were awesome. The Plustek is just not a sharp and lacks the ability to scan multiple images at once.
With regards to the Silverfast software, those who could get it to work are happy with it. Problem is that most have given up out of frustration. For me its also a matter the principal that you have to buy a new version for every other scanner at the full price witch is not cheap to begin with. Even worse rather than maintaining the software to keep up with new versions of the (Apple) operating system and just make them available as an update like 99% of all software does. Silverfast forces you to buy a version at the full price. This is I think bad service and should not be rewarded with a purchase :mad:

I just did a search on Ebay and cannot find at Coolscan 5000 for less than $2500 :eek: Given the age of this scanner and the fact that repairs are becoming an issue. I personally would not spend that amount of money on it. To my knowledge a new Plustek scanner is currently the only feasible option with regards to a dedicated 35mm film scanner.

If you are a Mac user most people including me prefer Veuscan. Its not perfect but it does the job well and is affordable without funny update prices and different versions for different scanners.

In case you go for a Canoscan flatbed scanner try the original software first its not bad at all.

Looking back and considering the available budget I would seriously consider the Epson V750 with either the original software or Vuescan. Check with betterscanning.com for their film holders. For the ultimate scan you can even do liquid scanning :D

Check my flicker feed, all 120 format is done with a Canoscan and 35mm with the Plustec 7600i. I hardly use and photoshop other than a slight tweak on the levels, sharpening and dust removal. Occasionally dodge and burn.



Rob-F said:
Actually a Coolscan would not be way out of my budget. I see a number of them going for under $1000. The question is whether it is smart to buy a Coolscan at any price, now that technical support/repairs for them are pretty chancy. If people here were urging me to stretch the budget to get one a little over $1000, I would even do that. But that is not the advice I'm getting.

I am a little discouraged by your describing the 7600i as merely "OK." Others seem to think it's quite good. And I didn't know that Silverfast was regarded as dreaded, or as junk. That's a little scary, too. I thought it was supposed to be the driver to end all drivers!

If you didn't think the Coolscans were out of my budget, would you be suggesting one? Which one?
Click to expand...
 
For the price I'd recommend Nikon 4000 ED with SA-21. Besides of the scanning quality, you can modify the default SA-21 holder so that it is recognized as SA-30. And thus you can scan a whole roll at a time. It saves so much time!
 
Rogier said:
Looking back and considering the available budget I would seriously consider the Epson V750 with either the original software or Vuescan. Check with betterscanning.com for their film holders. For the ultimate scan you can even do liquid scanning :
Click to expand...

But several posters have said that the Epson doesn't really cut it for 35mm. I have the original perfection 2450. Based on my results, as well as the awkwardness of trying to scan 35mm on a flatbed, I am not encouraged, even though the V700 and 750 are doubtless improved.

Liquid scanning? Did someone say LIQUID SCANNING? ARGGH!:eek:

So far the 4000 or Scan Dual V seem like good choices, and maybe the Plustek 7600i, which has the advantage of being new and under warranty. But it is fixed focus. Even my old Scan Dual IV had autofocus.
 
Last edited:
thegman said:
Save most of the $1000 and get a Canon FS4000US. .
Click to expand...
The Canon FS4000US was my first film scanner. I bought it new just before production stopped. After the stepper motor quit running, I bought a new Nikon Coolscan V ED. I have no complaints about the Nikon, although I miss the filmstrip holder that the Canon used. I have since picked up a very slightly used Coolscan 4000 ED. The nikon software will not run with my current editing computer, so I have a dedicated Win XP computer with a removable HD for the scanners. I never had any luck using VueScan with Win 7. I hope this setup will last me as long as I have film to scan. I need to find an APS adapter for the Nikon scanners to scan the large amount of APS negatives I shot years ago with a Canon EOS IX. The Canon FS4000US included the APS adapter.
 
At this point I'm leaning back toward Nikon, based on the comments here. For one thing, I like the 4.2 dynamic range of the Coolscan 4000. I can't seem to find anything on the dynamic range of the Coolscan V ED. Nikon doesn't seem to mention it on the website I found. Is it as good as the 4000?
 
sanmich said:
[Edit]: the coolscans have a tendency to flare, and to create a dark band at the side of the frame. also, when using the auto-loaders (SA-21/30) there is enough diferenc in the film height so that part of the frame may not be totally in focus.
For these reasons too, you should consider the FH-3/slide loader when working on high quality scanning.
Click to expand...

Hmm, that dark-band business and the flare could be deal-breakers. How widespread are these problems, across the various Coolscan models, users, and operating systems? I'm thinking of a Coolscan 4000, but this is enough to scare me back to the Plustec 7600. In fact, it's only the greater dynamic range of the 4000 (4.2) that inclines me toward it over the Plustek, which has I believe 3.5 DR.
 
Last edited:
Most likely you already know this: I saw this pdf (from Plustek), which nicely summarises lot of the stuffs I read here at RFF. Without going in to advanced technical details it nicely explains how Plustek (probably most non-Drum) scanners work.

Just an idea: if you have a local Freegle type (Google it) thing, you might try getting a scanner for free. I got a flatbad (Epson Perfection 4870) that way.
 
Rob-F said:
Hmm, that dark-band business and the flare could be deal-breakers. How widespread are these problems, across the various Coolscan models, users, and operating systems? I'm thinking of a Coolscan 4000, but this is enough to scare me back to the Plustec 7600. In fact, it's only the greater dynamic range of the 4000 (4.2) that inclines me toward it over the Plustek, which has I believe 3.5 DR.
Click to expand...

Rob,
Just to make things clear:
The dark band IS due to flare, and happens only when using the auto loader (SA-21). With this module, you also have issues with the point of focus.
I think that it's acceptable for my workflow:
When I scan a full roll, I don't scan at the highest quality anyway. When I want to work on one image, I rescan it, this time with the FH-3 and slide adapter, in RAW format and squeeze the maximum available quality.
What it means is that if you buy your scanner specifically for a very few, high quality scans, the automatism of the Nikon is of no use for you...
 
Maddoc's point about parts no longer being available for the 4000 ED have forced me to reconsider. Now I'm getting pretty close to pulling the trigger for a Coolscan V. They are going in my price range, and I like the 4.2 DR. I could have used the 4000, since I do have Firewire on the iMac; but I don't want to have an orphan if it breaks. (Gee, I wonder how long it will be before they run out of parts for the V?)

I'm assuming that a 4.2 dynamic range will give me a much better scan than the 3.5 of the Plustek. Better shadow detail with Velvia, and better B&W scans. The 3600 resolution of the Plustek would probably be enough for me.

I'd be using it with my iMac and Snow Leopard. I would take the advice and get the FH-3, if I got a Coolscan.
 
Still not done asking questions! Coolscan 4000 is 16 bit. Coolscan V is only 14 bit. Is there a noticeable difference?
 
I'd buy two cheap $200 Minolta Dual Scans or a mint $500 5400II, VueScan, and not think about it again. The specs these guys toss around are comparing apples to oranges, there is no standard for any of their measurements and most of it is interpolated anyway. You have to look at the scans and make prints. Then settle down and shoot and make images, not pixel peep.

All the 35mm film scanners are always going to be better than any flatbed so why worry about it? And some are going to do better with color or B&W depending on light source and design... why worry about it? If you can't make a decent 11x17 from the worst of the film scanners then you're doing something wrong. And if you take the world's greatest 35mm film photo, you can justify going to get it scanned on a Howtek drum or something way better than any prosumer film scanner, even a $2000 one ;-p

Plustek maybe but it sure is nice to let the scanner scan several at a time. Of course the tractor drive is where they all seem to fail, so Plustek just skipped needing one! But OMG one at a time would be agony....

An Epson with the larger transparency unit is great for proofing, snapshots, or basic internet scanning - the 4990, 700, 750.

Just my two cents.
 
Last edited:
Frank Version Two makes many very valid points.

Yes the failure rate of autofeed mechanisms is high and that is the one reason we don't have them on the Plustek OpticFilm 7XXX series. But scanning one image at a time is not that painful. At least with my workflow.

Typically I will scan the first negative and then while the next negative is scanning, I will be doing final editing of the first negative in Photoshop. I can typically work my way thru a 36 exposure roll of film in about an hour.
 
Thanks for all the help, fellas. I just pulled the trigger on a Coolscan V. I just needed to get this desire for a Nikon scanner out of my system. I may very well still get a Plustek and/or a replacement for my Minolta. I'll have to see how I like working with the Nikon.
 
Frank Version Two said:
I'd buy two cheap $200 Minolta Dual Scans or a mint $500 5400II, VueScan, and not think about it again.

But OMG one at a time would be agony....
Click to expand...

Well, when I had the Scan Dual IV, I could load up to four slides in the holder, but I still had to push buttons to initiate separately the scanning of each slide. So I don't know if the Nikon (or Plustek) will really be any slower.

The Coolscan V finally arrived. I set it up this AM, and everything works. I'm using Nikon Scan, which installed and booted up on the iMac with Snow leopard, without a hitch. Now for the steep learning curve! The first thing I want to research is if I can make the pre-scan display larger than a thumbnail, so I can actually see it, like you can with Vuescan.
 
Ok, so I was able to acquire a sweet Epson V750 for just under 500, was that a good deal? As of right now, I only shoot 35mm and I don't know if I'll ever go into medium format. I'm not SUPER picky with how my scans come out, as long as they are pretty accurate. I don't expect it to be a pro lab type of scan. Do you think the V750 was good for that and is batch scanning easy?

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top