Phil U Posted June 17, 2014 Share #1 Â Posted June 17, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Those scanning 35mm should take a look at the Kodak/Pakon F135 scanner. This is an old mini lab scanner which has come available to the public in plentiful numbers and a great price. Â I just got one and it's been a revelation and makes life very very easy :) Â 2000dpi with DX code reader, full roll with digital ice in under 5 minutes. perfectly focused, perfect c41 colours straight out of the scanner, also scans black and white, Outputs TIFF, JPEG or RAW scan files.. Â Cost = $250 bucks / 150 quid. Â Buyers Guide: Pakon Kodak F-135 Plus 35mm Scanner | lamfoto.net https://www.facebook.com/groups/657750677577306/679535658732141 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 17, 2014 Posted June 17, 2014 Hi Phil U, Take a look here Scan a whole roll in 5 minutes. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nick_S Posted June 18, 2014 Share #2 Â Posted June 18, 2014 Interesting suggestion -- unlike most minilab equipment this looks quite compact (not much worse than a Nikon ED9000). What about software support, connectivity and drivers for computers with modern operating systems etc.? Â Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted June 18, 2014 Share #3 Â Posted June 18, 2014 But low res, that makes only 6mp from a 35mm frame. Â Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share #4  Posted June 18, 2014 Interesting suggestion -- unlike most minilab equipment this looks quite compact (not much worse than a Nikon ED9000). What about software support, connectivity and drivers for computers with modern operating systems etc.? Nick  It is roughly the same size as a flatbed scanner. Not quite as big on plan but a little taller at the back. It is a very well built, sturdy machine. It connects via USB but only runs on windows XP.  I have mine running on a Mac using windows XP via the Mac Parallels software (i.e. a virtual machine). This could not have been any easier to set up and use, absolutely trouble free.  There are similar virtual machine options for Windows but, in true Microsoft style, it seems people have sometimes encountered some hurdles setting them up. But everybody does seem to get them running in the end. - see the facebook group for details.  The other option is to obtain an old windows xp laptop and use as a dedicated machine for that scanner but that wouldn't be my preferred option.  The software and drivers come with the machine and the very latest version with support for black and white scanning is available for free as a download from the facebook group. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 18, 2014 Share #5  Posted June 18, 2014 But low res, that makes only 6mp from a 35mm frame. Gerry  I've never achieved any better results from 35mm with scans higher than 7mpx.  It is troubling that we have to find a Windows XP distribution to use it. Or am I wrong?  . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share #6  Posted June 18, 2014 But low res, that makes only 6mp from a 35mm frame. Gerry  True. But this is perfect for web images and prints up to 8x10. If you have any masterpieces that you want to print big then you would want to have those frames them scanned more professionally. I think that's true of most consumer scanners that don't cost megabucks.  At the very least, it is perfect for scanning the whole roll quickly and conveniently and being able to have good quality images to make an assessment.  Don't underestimate the quality of these scans. The scans are better than you would achieve from a flatbed because they are so well focused. And in terms of bang for the buck, for 35mm it is a really excellent solution, especially for C41 colour. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share #7  Posted June 18, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've never achieved any better results from 35mm with scans higher than 7mpx. It is troubling that we have to find a Windows XP distribution to use it. Or am I wrong?  .  You have to use windows XP one way or another. Either on a dedicated computer or using a virtual machine on a modern OS. But it does work fine either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share #8 Â Posted June 18, 2014 The software and drivers come with the machine and the very latest version with support for black and white scanning is available for free as a download from the facebook group. Â P.s. I'm not sure if it's already clear but you have to use the dedicated scanning software to use this machine. You cannot use vuescan or silverfast and you don't make a 'flat scan' with this machine, like you would with a plustek or flatbed. Â You can tweak the exposure, contrast and colours in the software or take the TIFF output and do the same in 3rd party software if you wish but a lot of the time it is just not necessary and the scans are good to go right out of the machine, which is nice. You get simple straightforward scans that look like the medium that was scanned, without all the messing around with Photoshop or plugins like colorperfect to achieve the tones, contrast or colours you expect to see from that medium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobitybob Posted June 18, 2014 Share #9 Â Posted June 18, 2014 Thanks for this it looks intriguing. Â If you use a Mac and don't fancy shelling out for Parallels or Fusion for just this one program then you could try https://www.virtualbox.org/ which is free and works well with XP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted June 19, 2014 Share #10 Â Posted June 19, 2014 The Pakon scanners have recently come to my attention, and since I have a fairly recent WinXP machine that still has much life in it, plus installation discs, it seems like an intriguing option. Â I know that this would be way faster than a Plustek, but how do you feel about the quality of the Pakon scans compared with consumer film scanners? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted June 19, 2014 Author Share #11  Posted June 19, 2014 The Pakon scanners have recently come to my attention, and since I have a fairly recent WinXP machine that still has much life in it, plus installation discs, it seems like an intriguing option. I know that this would be way faster than a Plustek, but how do you feel about the quality of the Pakon scans compared with consumer film scanners?  Compared to flatbeds the results are way better.  Compared to the plusteks the results are going to be as good up to the Pakon's 2000dpi resolution IMO. The Plusteks are optically good for around 3000-3500 dpi, so if you want to print a lot of 11x17 (A3) then the plustek may be a better choice. Also, if you want to do a lot of work on the negative then a 'flat scan' on the plustek would also be better choice.  The Nikon coolscans I'm sure will do an equal or better job than the nikon (and certainly at higher resolution) but they are not in the same price range and so 'you pays your money and you makes your choice'.  The Pakon is all about convenience - achieving a straightforward good quality scan without a whole lot of work. It's a great machine for the money. As part of a film workflow it really takes away a lot of the hassle. Use the Pakon for everyday and when you find a real keeper that you want to do something special with then take it to be drum scanned or similar.  Here is a sample comparison of Pakon vs Flatbed (not mine)...  Epson Flatbed - http://www.flickr.com/photos/37460295@N05/12216501653/  Pakon - http://www.flickr.com/photos/37460295@N05/12216499823/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkmedia Posted August 4, 2014 Share #12 Â Posted August 4, 2014 I notice Phil is pimping the Pakon! I notice someone was linking to photos of my granny a while back! Â I written a article all about the Pakon F-135 Plus on the filmwasters web forum in the article section. Â I use it exactly as Phil describes, I use it right after developing and drying a roll but before cutting it into strips for a print file. That way I dont have to go reorganize everything and it's quicker to do a single strip. Better photos I tend to rescan. I've also archived misc 20-30 years old film (about 30 rolls) with it. I mostly shoot 120 roll, sheet and instant film so dont use the Pakon all too much. I made a compare to a basic Epson flatbed as that what many of the filmwasters forum member use so I consider that somewhat of a baseline. I also have a coolscan but have not scanned a compare with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derphilipp Posted August 5, 2014 Share #13 Â Posted August 5, 2014 does anyone know if/where I can get my hands on one of these things in Europe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeswe Posted August 13, 2014 Share #14 Â Posted August 13, 2014 does anyone know if/where I can get my hands on one of these things in Europe? Â They were mostly sold in the US minilab market and are therefore difficult to come by in Europe, but you can order them from AAA imaging or WE BUY MINILABS in the US. Aaaimaging is also present on Ebay. This is where I got my unit from. The power supply is universal, so you just have to exchange the "pigtail" against a standard one that matches your country's power socket. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkmedia Posted September 3, 2014 Share #15  Posted September 3, 2014 They were mostly sold in the US minilab market and are therefore difficult to come by in Europe  That is indeed true, but I recall a number of major French chemist chain labs had them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted September 3, 2014 Share #16 Â Posted September 3, 2014 I want one beside my Nikon LS4000 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkmedia Posted September 4, 2014 Share #17 Â Posted September 4, 2014 On the filmwasters group forum, I did indeed write a usage guide to the scanner. Â Pakon F135 Plus scanner guide Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted December 17, 2014 Share #18  Posted December 17, 2014 I continue to be impressed by this little Pakon 135+ scanner. Using the Plustek 8100, it takes longer to scan a frame to TIFF, and PP it than it does to scan a whole roll of C41 colour neg on the Pakon. Obviously, when Colour Perfect is involved, the Plustek routine takes even longer. The following scans are Pakon 135+, Plustek TIFF scan, and Plustek TIFF RAW through Colour Perfect. Now you might think, "Well, they all look rubbish", but I'm afraid that is as good as my colour scanning gets. My point is, I get my poor scans unbelievably quick with the Pakon. Many film users are still film users because of the convenience of this scanner, and a few users have bought a spare Pakon as it's priced so reasonably. How long will that remain? Pete  Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!   Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!   ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/229026-scan-a-whole-roll-in-5-minutes/?do=findComment&comment=2730037'>More sharing options...
pico Posted December 17, 2014 Share #19 Â Posted December 17, 2014 Looks like you have a great stock photo there, Pete. It has a lot of ways to use type over. Hope that does not offend you, but as a former graphics designer I love it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derphilipp Posted December 19, 2014 Share #20 Â Posted December 19, 2014 In case anyone wants to see more samples from the pakon: Â These were all scanned with it. Mostly without any correction. Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.