gavinlg
Mentor
Kyle Mcdougall on youtube just posted this fantastic David v Goliath comparison between the Plustek 8100 and Nikon CoolScan 9000 on his youtube channel. If you haven't subscribed to his channel yet, his videos are some of the more useful ones around for film photographers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shNdiq2kKr8
I've long been saying the Plustek scanners are top notch (with a disclaimer that they are best used with Vuescan and Negative Lab Pro software), so was pleased to see this confirmed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shNdiq2kKr8
I've long been saying the Plustek scanners are top notch (with a disclaimer that they are best used with Vuescan and Negative Lab Pro software), so was pleased to see this confirmed!
paulfish4570
Mentor
thank you ...
jmonat7
-
I swear by the Plusteks. I started with an 8100 and upgraded to the 8200 to reap the benefits of the IT8 color calibration (this was before Negative Lab Pro existed). They are both wonderful. I regularly do 12x18 inkjet prints with the plustek scans and the detail is outstanding.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Very detailed comparison.
For dust like specks I enable iRD on mine 8200i Plustek. He is using 8100, I don't think it has it, but Nikon has it, if I'm not mistaken.
For clouds issue, multi scan.
VueScan gives bad results with mine 8200i. SilverFast is better on results and more advanced in settings.
I'll put it this way. For direction film usage is going, Plustek is totally enough. And even if I would be still going maniac on film, I'd rather went Huss's way than buying some electronic vintage.
For dust like specks I enable iRD on mine 8200i Plustek. He is using 8100, I don't think it has it, but Nikon has it, if I'm not mistaken.
For clouds issue, multi scan.
VueScan gives bad results with mine 8200i. SilverFast is better on results and more advanced in settings.
I'll put it this way. For direction film usage is going, Plustek is totally enough. And even if I would be still going maniac on film, I'd rather went Huss's way than buying some electronic vintage.
astrosecret
Recovering rollei snob
the nikon looks pretty poor with the hard grain here. their led light really accentuates it. this has always been my issue with nikon. i actually prefer the plustek, add a little unsharp mask and it looks better imo.
wish he would do one of the 120 plustek scanners. i heard a problem with these plustkes is eventually they have an issue with color banding as they age. not reliable.
wish he would do one of the 120 plustek scanners. i heard a problem with these plustkes is eventually they have an issue with color banding as they age. not reliable.
gavinlg
Mentor
Likewise - I've even had a couple of Minolta scan duals and prefer the plustek.
You should try scanning as a RAW DNG file in vuescan (you can possibly do it with Silverfast as well) and converting the files with Negative Lab Pro. It's a game changer.
I think the 120 had issues with banding due to some sort of defective sensor. The 35mm models, as far as I know, haven't been problematic. I've been using the 8100 since 2014 and I've had no problems with them.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The Plusteks are garbage. Sorry, but I bought and returned three of them before giving up. Every. Single. One. gave scans that were holga-soft on one side and sharp on the other. One of them also had banding!
Worthless. Not even in the same universe as the Nikons.
Worthless. Not even in the same universe as the Nikons.
jmonat7
-
Well this just isn't true. I am not sure what happened to your scanners but I have only heard positive things about the 35mm Plustek scanners. Their only downside is the manual feed. Also the Plustek 8100 is ~$150 used and I bought my 8200 for $200 used. The Coolscan 9000 is $3000 used. Is the Nikon scanner better? Most definitely. Is the Plustek in the same universe as the Nikon? Also definitely. Not as good, but a stellar scanner that far outperforms its price point.
Here is a jpeg scan from my 8200 shot with a not so sharp lens, the ZM 50mm Sonnar. Detail is phenomenal for $200, colors aren't too bad either.
West Hampton, NY. 8/2018. by Joe Monat, on Flickr
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I don't have LR 6, mine is 4.6 and zero need to update.
aizan
Mentor
Why are you guys still using film scanners instead of doing DSLR scanning? The only reason I'm keeping my scanners is because I haven't really gone digital yet. Have you tried DSLR scanning and found it more of a hassle?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I just bought a used Nikon scanner to replace my dead one. I have tried for 3 months now to get good results with camera scanning and I just plain can't get 'scans' where the entire image is sharp. Its the alignment of the film and camera, and I have gotten lucky a couple of times then bad again. I got tired of **** with it, I have work to get done and I had wasted WAY too much time trying to avoid doing the right thing and just buying another good scanner. I paid almost $1000 for the Nikon scanner I just got and the time I wasted trying to get camera scanning to work was worth far more money.... I was stupid to not just buy the damned thing in the beginning.
madNbad
Well-known
I bought a lightly used 7600i for a hundred dollars in 2012. It was a fine scanner, produced good images but t took an afternoon to scan a roll of film. Two years ago, I slapped my wife’s Sony A6000 on a copy stand and haven’t thought about a scanner since.
gavinlg
Mentor
That's some bad luck Chris - 2/2 have been good for me.
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Horses for Courses for 35mm film
Horses for Courses for 35mm film
What I saw is the Plustek 8200 occupies far less real estate on a desk top than either a flat bed or the 9000 ED scanner - and - it is most definitely going to yield much better scans than a flat bed scanner. If you receive one that works properly - for the cost - the Plustek knocks the ball out of the park.
From experience with my Nikon 8000 ED - the 9000 ED is a friggin beast with regards to size and weight. A smaller Nikon 5000 ED or 4000 ED would have been better suited for this youtube video. You don't need Nikon's big dog to scan 35mm.
A Coolscan 9000 is really going to shine for those of us who scan medium format negatives. For example: a 6x9 negative yields over 100 mega pixels.
For 35mm I have a refurbished Coolscan 4000 ED that was less than $500 shipped, 2years ago. It has been a splendid performer. A "refurbished" Coolscan 5000 ED will cost nearly 4 times what a "new" 8200i runs for on Amazon.
Horses for Courses for 35mm film
What I saw is the Plustek 8200 occupies far less real estate on a desk top than either a flat bed or the 9000 ED scanner - and - it is most definitely going to yield much better scans than a flat bed scanner. If you receive one that works properly - for the cost - the Plustek knocks the ball out of the park.
From experience with my Nikon 8000 ED - the 9000 ED is a friggin beast with regards to size and weight. A smaller Nikon 5000 ED or 4000 ED would have been better suited for this youtube video. You don't need Nikon's big dog to scan 35mm.
A Coolscan 9000 is really going to shine for those of us who scan medium format negatives. For example: a 6x9 negative yields over 100 mega pixels.
For 35mm I have a refurbished Coolscan 4000 ED that was less than $500 shipped, 2years ago. It has been a splendid performer. A "refurbished" Coolscan 5000 ED will cost nearly 4 times what a "new" 8200i runs for on Amazon.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Besides the quite good Plustek 8100 / 8200, there is also the option of the more advanced and higher resolving Pacific Image PrimeFilm XA, which is also available in Europe as Reflecta RPS 10M:
https://filmscanner.info/en/ReflectaRPS10M.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLuyGeYJPX4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTERW92Tg0Q
Cheers, Jan
Doddle
Established
The XA / RPS 10M is a real gamble, if you get a working one then good luck keeping it working. The weak spot on this one is the automatic film advance, it loses its grip very quickly and you end up with bad spacing. Even if you apply some of the internet forum wisdom like scanning film upside down for added grip, the RPS 10M is just not a well designed piece of tech made for long haul use.
For scanning single frames its more faffing about than any scanner with a simple 6 frame strip holder.
Plusteks.. I don't mind the images it spits out, 48 bit positives converted in NLP with around 3200 effective DPI with plenty of detail imo for bigger prints. But its just too damn slow, I spend a full year having 'Plustek 8200 sundays' where I was scanning away my 35mm frames from the whole week. This is with a light pad & loupe 'pre-cull' to minimize my frames. And I'm not even a high volume shooter and don't do much in post. I was still homebound 6 hours (at a minimum) straight a week..
Camera scan rigs have so many variables that to get good results takes quite some tweaking and there is a lot of bad info out there. The two issues I see are bad macro lenses and bad LED light sources. Fix those two and you're going to see very good results.
I have a BEOON that takes seconds to setup, doesn't require calibrating with a mirror and such - and scans frames in seconds. Compares to a dedicated scanner its no contest. Its also basically future proof, if my Sony crop sensor dies or I want to upgrade any bits I always can.
Much better than buying a 20 year old piece of scanning tech that is almost guaranteed to need service and replacement parts in the coming few years, a problem I already have with electronic cameras. The price of 24MP sensor cameras is constantly coming down, the price of a LS-5000 or some such is just going up.
FWIW the very best 35mm scanner is the Minolta 5400 but good luck keeping that one running. Mk. I develops light source issues, Mk. II is also fickle. Bottom line is no one currently makes a well designed, quick solution that will keep working for the next 10 years.
For scanning single frames its more faffing about than any scanner with a simple 6 frame strip holder.
Plusteks.. I don't mind the images it spits out, 48 bit positives converted in NLP with around 3200 effective DPI with plenty of detail imo for bigger prints. But its just too damn slow, I spend a full year having 'Plustek 8200 sundays' where I was scanning away my 35mm frames from the whole week. This is with a light pad & loupe 'pre-cull' to minimize my frames. And I'm not even a high volume shooter and don't do much in post. I was still homebound 6 hours (at a minimum) straight a week..
Camera scan rigs have so many variables that to get good results takes quite some tweaking and there is a lot of bad info out there. The two issues I see are bad macro lenses and bad LED light sources. Fix those two and you're going to see very good results.
I have a BEOON that takes seconds to setup, doesn't require calibrating with a mirror and such - and scans frames in seconds. Compares to a dedicated scanner its no contest. Its also basically future proof, if my Sony crop sensor dies or I want to upgrade any bits I always can.
Much better than buying a 20 year old piece of scanning tech that is almost guaranteed to need service and replacement parts in the coming few years, a problem I already have with electronic cameras. The price of 24MP sensor cameras is constantly coming down, the price of a LS-5000 or some such is just going up.
FWIW the very best 35mm scanner is the Minolta 5400 but good luck keeping that one running. Mk. I develops light source issues, Mk. II is also fickle. Bottom line is no one currently makes a well designed, quick solution that will keep working for the next 10 years.
albireo
Established
Love my Plustek 7500i and my Minolta Scan Dual IV. I use both with Vuescan.
The Plustek gives great results. The Minolta gives OUTSTANDING results.
Somebody was asking about DSLR scanning.
There is simply no way I would go back to purchasing a DSLR and all the associated paraphernalia when my Minolta absolutely blows any DSLR scan I've seen out of the water, and this for 1/10th of the monetary outlet.
Long live good film scanners - if you don't own a DSLR already, you don't need a DSLR for awesome hybrid (film + digitalisation) photography.
The Plustek gives great results. The Minolta gives OUTSTANDING results.
Somebody was asking about DSLR scanning.
There is simply no way I would go back to purchasing a DSLR and all the associated paraphernalia when my Minolta absolutely blows any DSLR scan I've seen out of the water, and this for 1/10th of the monetary outlet.
Long live good film scanners - if you don't own a DSLR already, you don't need a DSLR for awesome hybrid (film + digitalisation) photography.