Nick De Marco Posted January 25, 2015 Share #1 Posted January 25, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Anyone tried the Reflecta Midformat Scan MF5000 (so branded in UK, Braun elsewhere), I'm thinking of buying ti to scan medium format and 35mm negatives. I used to have Nikon coolscan (35mm only) but it packed up. Now use Epson 750, it's good for prints and large format or funny size negs (XPan), but I don't like the quality that much and I'm hoping a dedicated neg scanner will be much better. Seen a good review of the Reflecta/Braun here: Review Reflecta MF5000: medium format scanner for digitizing medium formats from 4,5x6 up to 6x12 as well as 35mm negatives and mounted slides Wondered if anyone has used it. It's apparently faster (and a bit cheaper) than the equivalent Plusteck Thanks Nick 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 Hi Nick De Marco, Take a look here Reflecta Midformat Scan MF5000. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
nickdando Posted January 26, 2015 Share #2 Posted January 26, 2015 I have the Braun version, bought from ScanDig, as it was on offer over Christmas. Patrick Wagner gave it a better review on his site than the similar Reflecta, so I went for it. I have still to unpack it! Nick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 26, 2015 Share #3 Posted January 26, 2015 I haven't used this scanner so this is just fwiw. The MF5000 certainly priced rather attractively but I am wondering how well it will perform for high-resolution scans of 35mm film, given the test chart scan they post in the review. Admittedly, they post very small images of such charts in their review, but I see only very little difference between the MF5000 and the Epson V750. You might want to add to your consideration a used Minolta Multi Pro (two are for sale at Ffordes at the moment for similar money). Just a thought. br Philip Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick De Marco Posted January 27, 2015 Author Share #4 Posted January 27, 2015 Thanks for the replies. I'm primarily using for the increase in quality from MF The Minolta is a nice ida, but sounds slow Having researched a bit more I am now coming around to the Plustek 120 Optek - it's important for me to get a serviced scanner having previously had a Nikon Coolscan die on me Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted January 27, 2015 Share #5 Posted January 27, 2015 I have the Plustek 120 and can only heap it with praise. Scans of the same negative are much nicer than my old Minolta Multi Pro and those done with a Nikon 9000, the resolution is right up there with the best, and the negative holders are superb. It was the holders that initially let the Plustek down in early reviews, they were dimensionally wrong (I guess because the moulding process differed between prototype and production) and had to be remade to get the image properly focused. So check if you see a second hand machine and ask about any focus issues, but they should have all been replaced by now. Mine is used with Vuescan in Win 7 and it works very well, although the drivers or Vuescan itself sometimes doesn't pick up the scanner immediately, and one or the other needs switching off and on again. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeswe Posted January 27, 2015 Share #6 Posted January 27, 2015 There is a thread over at Rangefinder Forum with sample pictures of the Plustek 120 and also discussing some issues (yellow banding, strong chromatic abberation) that have reportedly appeared in units sold over the last couple of months. I was considering buying the Plustek some time ago, but what seems to be ongoing problems with QC has finally put me off. I am sure there are individual units out there that work just fine, but Scandig's decision to stop selling the scanner due to problems with the product and a high rate of customer returns is telling me that the reports on RFF are more than just singular, isolated cases. The Reflecta ... well ... before you buy it, make sure you can live with its ... err... ergonomics. The included standard MF film holder is surely a candidate for the worst though-out film holder design in the history of film scanning. To explain ... This MF film holder is not big enough to accommodate (what I and probably many others would consider) a standard length MF film strip, e.g. 3 frames of 6x6. That means, to be able to use this holder, you will have to cut your existing film strips into shorter length, resulting in two short pieces of film (one with 2 frames, the other with 1 frame). Well, somehow Reflecta figured out there was some room for improvement. So some time after the product launch they designed an accessory MF film holder (has to be bought separately for ~40 Euros) that ... drumroll... is long enough to accommodate a standard length strip of MF film. Now, don't cheer to early ... Although the holder can hold three frames, due to size limitations of the scanner, it can scan only two of them at a time. To scan the third frame, you will have to remove the holder from the scanner, open it, take out the film, turn it around, close the holder and re-insert it into the scanner. I admit that this might be okay for casual use, if you scan two or three strips at a time, but for anyone who plans to scan several films at a time --- and I would assume that anyone who spends 1500 Euros on a scanner has more than two or three strips of film to scan --- this design flaw has the potential to turn into a royal PITA ... 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick De Marco Posted January 27, 2015 Author Share #7 Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for the feedback On Plustek problems - I had read those have now largely been sorted - but I better check again.... update, having cones so I see you are right. It's very recent. Damn... back to the Reflecta On the Reflecta - I thought the film strip issue easy to solve with the 40 euro holder (and I can find the Reflect for £5000 less than the Plustek). But, you are right about the still annoying ergonomics. One of the reasons I thought the Plustek might be better. I did, however, read one strange review which made it sound like the Plustek took forever to scan negatives (and the Reflecta is much faster) - I don't know what anyone's experience is of that? Such a shame Nikon stopped making scanners - still difficult to find anything of the same quality, that doesn't cost a Hasselblad Edited January 27, 2015 by Nick De Marco Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 27, 2015 Share #8 Posted January 27, 2015 still difficult to find anything of the same quality, that doesn't cost a Hasselblad The other option is rental. There are Hasselblad scanners available to use by the hour (on a drop-in basis) in London. £35 per hour at Printspace, for example. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 27, 2015 Share #9 Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) I did, however, read one strange review which made it sound like the Plustek took forever to scan negatives (and the Reflecta is much faster) - I don't know what anyone's experience is of that? I have a Plustek 120. I have no issues with quality or speed. I'll add that my first unit had issues, but Mark Drusiak (?) and the UK dealer fell over themselves to replace the unit, the UK dealer even offering to bring a unit to my home and to help set it up. I can't fault their customer service for an unknown, run of the mill, amateur film photographer. Pete Edited January 27, 2015 by Stealth3kpl 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted January 27, 2015 Share #10 Posted January 27, 2015 I did, however, read one strange review which made it sound like the Plustek took forever to scan negatives (and the Reflecta is much faster) - I don't know what anyone's experience is of that? At 5800 dpi it is very quick with 35mm, quicker than an Epson 750 for MF, but keep in mind, if you scan at the maximum 10,600 dpi it will take longer than other scanners on the market at the moment because they don't go that high. Speed will not only will be dependent on the software used (but I'm not going to use the Silverfast that came with it just to find out), and whatever else is switched on such as dust reduction, multi sampling, etc. I think the speed is perfectly acceptable for whatever task it is doing in comparison to other scanners. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted February 1, 2015 Share #11 Posted February 1, 2015 Out of curiosity, I would be interested how Plustek 120 owners handle the work flow, especially the scanning times. The scanner came out, when I thought about going back into 120 film*. Looking at the review on the site linked by Nick, I found the scanning times of several hours sobering. The only feasible solution I saw, was scanning three 6x6 frames over night, meaning four nights for 12 negatives. Although I'm an amateur with little demands regarding throughput, I would only have scanned the occasional single frame. They write in the review that the multi-exposure option is needed to get the most out of the scanner. It is certainly possible to switch this off or to use lower resolutions, however, going the MF route, investing in the equpiment and carrying it around, I wouldn't have wanted to compromise, when it comes to quality. But then, this is two years ago and Plustek might have improved the situation. Stefan *In the end, I decided to stay with 35mm. 120 was brillant, when I did my own enlargements about 20 years ago, 12 pictures (6x6) on a roll, six are enlarged, half a day was gone (including mixing the chemicals). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted February 1, 2015 Share #12 Posted February 1, 2015 Stefan, I think my Plustek 120 scans quicker than my v700 did. I use Vuescan with a single pass. On the rangefinder forum, start a new thread about scanning times to put your mind at ease. Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted February 1, 2015 Share #13 Posted February 1, 2015 Thank you, Pete, but I won't get back into MF for reasons which have nothing to do with scanning. I was simply curious about the use-case, but I guess that faster scans are sufficient in most cases, which leaves the maximum capability of the scanner for very large prints. Stefan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted February 1, 2015 Share #14 Posted February 1, 2015 They write in the review that the multi-exposure option is needed to get the most out of the scanner. . I think if your negatives are any good, the type that would print easily in a darkroom, then single pass scanning is perfectly acceptable and it's quick enough. If your negatives have blocked up shadows and blown highlights you can hardly blame the scanner if it needs multi pass scanning to salvage something. I use Vuescan and it's not slow although it doesn't give the instant satisfaction of opening a digital file. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richardgb Posted February 12, 2015 Share #15 Posted February 12, 2015 Anyone tried the Reflecta Midformat Scan MF5000 (so branded in UK, Braun elsewhere), <snip> Seen a good review of the Reflecta/Braun here: Review Reflecta MF5000: medium format scanner for digitizing medium formats from 4,5x6 up to 6x12 as well as 35mm negatives and mounted slides Wondered if anyone has used it. It's apparently faster (and a bit cheaper) than the equivalent Plusteck Thanks Nick I, too, am considering a scanner for my 35mm and 120 film archive. The Reflecta MF5000 looks tempting - in particular the review says the dpi claim is (largely) substantiated. It is worth reading other reviews on the same website to get a feel for the tests. The scanner's currently listed at £1099 in the UK (I've no connection with the dealer in question). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted February 17, 2015 Share #16 Posted February 17, 2015 In the Eur. 800-1400 price range there is not so many choice for a good 35mm/roll film scanner. I think the MF-5000 has good specs. The question is how good the scanner is in real practice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dicko101 Posted March 3, 2015 Share #17 Posted March 3, 2015 I am about to purchase a Pacific Image PF120 Pro at a very good price, which is essentially a rebranded MF5000 (although there are differences). I had a Plustek Opticfilm 120 for a period of time, you can read about my experiences on my blog, but the TL;DR version of it is that the unit had substantial banding (this was after the supposed fix up of things) and that my discussion of the issue helped bring a lot of people forward on the Plustek OF120 Flickr group who were experiencing (and continue to experience) similar problems. Plustek's responses to these problems has been mixed (although, as mentioned earlier, Mark D, formerly of Plustek USA deserves great commendation for his service and communication efforts while he was at the company). There still seem to be substantial QC issues with the Plustek 120, despite assurances from their representatives. I am not interested in playing Russian roulette with a $2000 scanner. I look forward to seeing what the PF120/MF5000 is capable of. If this fails, I'll just give up on photography and return to knitting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted March 3, 2015 Share #18 Posted March 3, 2015 http://luminous-landscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/The-New-Epson-V850-Pro-Scanner-Final.pdf This links to an 89 page .pdf comparing the V850 to a range of scanners including the Plustek, Nikons and Imacon and across formats. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted March 4, 2015 Share #19 Posted March 4, 2015 http://luminous-landscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/The-New-Epson-V850-Pro-Scanner-Final.pdf This links to an 89 page .pdf comparing the V850 to a range of scanners including the Plustek, Nikons and Imacon and across formats. Thanks Chris. Very interesting (I read it all). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted March 4, 2015 Share #20 Posted March 4, 2015 Hi All, Nick now wants to move to Reflecta for MF . What is a reproach for the Epson ? I think the Epson stands up very well especially for MF specially in b&w Look at this thread as we did : http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/160651-epson-v700-750-very-good-our.html On the paper , Reflecta has a Density Range (DR) = 3 and Epson = 4 ... but Epson can be improved with glasses "Better scanning" for the MF as for 135 Holders and Products for the Epson V700 V750 V750-M The glass significantly improves the general rendering of the photo including shadow details. Maybe it can help Nick to improve its scan ! Best Henry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.