philipus Posted January 11, 2013 Share #61 Posted January 11, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Pete, where have you seen K64 examples? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 11, 2013 Posted January 11, 2013 Hi philipus, Take a look here New Scanner OpticFilm 120. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thrid Posted January 13, 2013 Share #62 Posted January 13, 2013 I preview my neg sheets with a small webcam. It sits on a tripod looking down at the sheet on the light box and is feed in to my computer where the signal is inverted. Viola! Realtime preview to make your picks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted January 13, 2013 Share #63 Posted January 13, 2013 Ref proof sheets etc, I tend to scan them in their sleeve on my V700 as a 300dpi .pdf file. The bed is not quite big enough, but sufficient to give a reasonable glimpse of what is on that particular film. An example here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 14, 2013 Share #64 Posted January 14, 2013 Pete, where have you seen K64 examples? Winter | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 14, 2013 Share #65 Posted January 14, 2013 Thanks Pete. Yes that looks rather nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 14, 2013 Share #66 Posted January 14, 2013 thanks for posting the scan. still waiting for enough deliveries to read some commentary before buying -- and i do want to buy this scanner! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 14, 2013 Share #67 Posted January 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Lomography scanner Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 14, 2013 Share #68 Posted January 14, 2013 not quite the opticfilm 120, but thanks for the link Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 18, 2013 Share #69 Posted January 18, 2013 Big scan Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 19, 2013 Share #70 Posted January 19, 2013 Thanks. Just so there is no misunderstanding n my part this is a scan of ...... .? Meaning print or negative and what scanner and if the optic 120 the one just finally released? Btw I think scan looks great. And if neg and opt 120 can u enlighten on the workflow? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 19, 2013 Share #71 Posted January 19, 2013 According to the info on Flickr it is: Leica M3 (test photo) Rolleiflex 2,8F + Rolleinar 2 Kodak Tri-x + Spur Acurol N Plustek OpticFilm 120 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
VisualLifeLine Posted January 20, 2013 Share #72 Posted January 20, 2013 How would you rate the performance of the Plustek Opticfilm 120 in comparison to a Nikon Coolscan 8000 or 9000? Do you think it's a reasonable price? Please concern: you can get a Coolscan 8000 for 1500... Best regards, VisualLifeLine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 20, 2013 Share #73 Posted January 20, 2013 This is one of the 10,000$ questions, methinks. The 8000 is an interesting scanner for the price, though there are quite a few reports of banding issues. This supposedly also affects the 9000 but, as I understand it only to a significantly lesser extent - check the Yahoo Coolscan 8000/9000 group. Having only scanned just over a roll with my 9000 I can't really comment on this but I haven't seen any banding myself. I would think, though, that unless one needs the MF, and if one is set on buying second-hand, capability the 5000 might be a better contender than the 8000, but that's just a wild thought. There are quite a few available in various shops. I remain very interesting to see a comparison between the OpticFilm 120 and the 9000. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted January 20, 2013 Share #74 Posted January 20, 2013 I remain very interesting to see a comparison between the OpticFilm 120 and the 9000. The scanner comparison thread over at the APHOG forum now features samples for the Opticfilm 120 and the Nikon Coolscan V ED (not the 9000, but as close as it gets I suppose). Opticfilm 120 Nikon Coolscan V ED Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted January 20, 2013 Share #75 Posted January 20, 2013 I remain very interesting to see a comparison between the OpticFilm 120 and the 9000. After looking at that thread on the APHOG site, it appears there is a focusing issue or film flatness issue with the OpticFilm scans (?) (looking only at the raw scans and not the processed ones...) On the other hand, there have been other posts of scans elsewhere that look okay. Just my opinion, but I think you have the better scanner with the 9000. At least for now the Coolscan is a 'known quantity' and we do know that it has one of the best lenses (Nikkor ED lens.) The only weak spot are the film holders (like pretty much all consumer scanners, unfortunately.) But that can be corrected with ScanScience or Image Mechanics products and/or a bit of ingenuity and skill by the operator. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
el.nino Posted January 20, 2013 Share #76 Posted January 20, 2013 The BIG plus for the Coolscans is that they all have Autofocus! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted January 21, 2013 Share #77 Posted January 21, 2013 The BIG plus for the Coolscans is that they all have Autofocus! I agree, and apparently the Plustek OpticFilm has no autofocus and no adjustable focus which means it might have the same issues that many consumer flatbeds suffer. The holder would have to sit perfectly and so far there's no hint of a glass carrier being available either. This problem is also the complaint a reviewer had with the 35mm Plustek scanners: "Even though the Nikon scan is interpolated up from a lower resolution, it is clear that it's sharper and more detailed than the Plustek at its native 7200dpi. How can this be? I think the Plustek's presumably cheaper, fixed-focus optic can be one of the culprits here, which probably doesn't compare well with the Nikon's high-grade ED lens and auto-focus." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted January 21, 2013 Share #78 Posted January 21, 2013 I don't think we should write-off the Plustek just yet. While in development we've heard some very big claims made for the new scanner (that it was closer to an X1 than a 9000, for instance), and I'm not sure we should give up after just a few dud scans. However, if the basic equipment inside the scanner - especially the lens - is simply not capable of any better, then Plustek have missed an enormous opportunity. OT - I'm going to start another thread where anyone with experience of wet scanning can contribute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted January 21, 2013 Share #79 Posted January 21, 2013 I don't think we should write-off the Plustek just yet. I don't think so either, and I hope I didn't come off sounding like that. As I mentioned, there are other samples that look okay. But the film flatness of the holders and the fact that there is no autofocus is a bit of a concern. We'll have to wait and see as you say. There is a very long thread here: Plustek OpticFilm 120 - Photo.net Digital Darkroom Forum That link is around the middle of it and with someone who is doing some tests right now with 6x9 Velvia. But in that thread there is the same concern I mentioned about film flatness and lack of autofocus. The company rep (Mark Druziak) is on that thread. Here's an earlier post he made about someone else's concern on focus and film flatness (the Plustek will be using plastic holders; at least so far there's no glass option.) mark druziak , Dec 07, 2012; 04:06 p.m. "There are two different holders for 35mm. One is for film the other is for slides. However, you can scan unmounted slides in the 35mm film holder if you want. The design of the 35mm film holder is the same as the 120 holders. Each frame is supported on all four sides and the top frame is held in place magnetically. No autofocus. The holders are very rigid and robust. I forget the actual thickness of the frame but I think it is like 1/4". The optics are designed with a depth of focus to accomodate any variations in the film surface that isn't removed by the holder. So far in testing by LaserSoft and Plustek, there haven't been any problems with image sharpness caused by the lack of autofocus." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanzlr Posted January 22, 2013 Share #80 Posted January 22, 2013 While in development we've heard some very big claims made for the new scanner (that it was closer to an X1 than a 9000, for instance), ... that was actually said by a Silverfast employee during Photokina if I remember correctly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.