Scanning film: Plustek 8300 vs. Sony camera + Valoi easy35?

[jakontil]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/17/2023 at 5:03 AM, logan2z said:

I've been following this thread closely as I've been waffling back and forth for months about buying a digital camera/macro lens (plus copy stand, negative holder, etc) in order to digitize my negatives with a camera, or buy a better dedicated film scanner like the Plustek.  I currently use an Epson flatbed and really don't like the quality of my 35mm scans so I need to do something.  I don't already own a digital camera (I shoot film exclusively) so I don't really want to purchase a digital setup just for digitizing my negatives.  Yes, that would give me a digital camera which I would probably find some use for, but it's hard to justify the cost if it's likely to end up as a dedicated film scanner. 

Long story short, I just ordered the Plustek and it'll be here in a couple of days.  I'll give it a shot and see if it significantly betters my Epson.  If it doesn't then I'll return it and continue looking for a camera scanning solution.

I can assure you it’s significantly better, i used both for scanning before jumping on a digital camera scan for the sake’s of less time consuming but im very much satisfied with my outcomes from plustek, plus one thing is good with dedicated scanner like plustek, no worries to look for proper light source, unstable copy stand, reflections, distortion and on and on, but once set up is done, it flows with dslr scanning  

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Warton]

On 12/14/2023 at 6:45 PM, Mr.Prime said:

I wasn’t saying any if that. Only saying that using a digital camera to photograph the output from a film camera because I don’t want to use a digital camera in the first place is to me “silly in a humorous way” (Cambridge dictionary). You gotta have a certain, less serious (?) sense of humour to see it that way perhaps.

I’m sure that there are better options than the Plustek, and each to their own as to where they like to invest their time and money in this hobby and as to what kinds of results gives them pleasure.

 

But as to the thread title, I can say the Plustek does a great job for me. It’s easy to use, reliable (touch wood) and I like how it performs. Only limitation is, it can’t produce a contact sheet. A Sony camera could make a contact sheet type of image with the right set up.

 

Yes you did say that 

On 12/13/2023 at 11:34 AM, Mr.Prime said:

I use the Plustek. It's slow but it works and the results are good. I don't think I could face the idea of using a digital camera to photograph my negatives, it seems absurd if you know what I mean.

[logan2z]

On 12/18/2023 at 5:11 AM, jakontil said:

I can assure you it’s significantly better,

You're right, it is.  I re-scanned some negatives that I'd previously scanned with my Epson flatbed and the scans from the Plustek are significantly sharper.  I don't know how the Plustek results compare to a good camera scanning setup, but this is good enough for my purposes for now.

[Mr.Prime]

23 hours ago, Warton said:

Yes you did say that 

I didn’t say anything about one approach being intellectually reasoned, I have said nothing about the relative technical performance, I said that I find it humorous to use a digital camera in the chain when for me, using a film camera is in preference to using a digital camera. I also have not said anybody is absurd if they choose differently than me.

If I were to be less lazy and think about the technical differences, one factor would be that the linescan scanner can in principle expose every ‘object pixel’ on the film to a different colour pixel on the sensor whereas a digital camera uses a Bayer pattern. 

 

And Happy Christmas 🎄

Edited December 25, 2023 by Mr.Prime

[jakontil]

On 12/25/2023 at 3:30 AM, logan2z said:

You're right, it is.  I re-scanned some negatives that I'd previously scanned with my Epson flatbed and the scans from the Plustek are significantly sharper.  I don't know how the Plustek results compare to a good camera scanning setup, but this is good enough for my purposes for now.

If u r not bothered with the time spent on plustek, dont worry the dslr scanning, they r equally good IMHO, but sometimes when results tricky due to various reasons on dslr scanning, i’d go back to plustek for that particular frame

some seems better on plustek or dslr scanning and vice versa

[logan2z]

2 hours ago, jakontil said:

If u r not bothered with the time spent on plustek, dont worry the dslr scanning, they r equally good IMHO

The Plustek isn't as slow as I thought it would be based on reviews and forum comments. And I don't intend to scan every frame of a roll with the Plustek.  I'll still use the Epson to create digital contact sheets and then I'll re-scan those frames that I need in higher resolution (eg. those that I'm going to include in a book/zine) using the Plustek.  

[Mr.Prime]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That’s what I do, flatbed for contacts and Plustek for 35mm frames. I normally wouldn’t advocate two scanners but I needed a flatbed for larger film formats. I have a borrowed one.

[logan2z]

6 hours ago, Mr.Prime said:

I normally wouldn’t advocate two scanners but I needed a flatbed for larger film formats.

Right, I also use the flatbed for scanning 120 film, as well as the occasional document.  

[RayD28]

This is not a recommendation.  I use a Plustek 8200.  I load a film strip and do a prescan of each shot (five seconds each).  If it's a keeper I do a full scan (about three minutes).  Out of two rolls a couple of weeks ago, I had about ten keepers.  The film is filed so I don't feel bad about not digitizing everything.  I have a V Scan 600 but have not used it for years.  

 

[Mr.Prime]

Me too. And 5 keepers per roll would for me be a good result. One of the many secondary reasons why digital, which I used for decades, became less inspiring was dealing with so many frames. I don't mind having few keepers from a roll when I'm dealing with 24 or 36 frames at a time. After a holiday with the family and a nearly full memory card my digital photos needed some brutal behaviours to cull them down. After working with film again, I'm more careful with my iphone camera usage. I think my film use helps my digital.

Edited December 27, 2023 by Mr.Prime

[Jipster]

On 9/15/2023 at 4:00 AM, Ouroboros said:

I went from being a dslr scanning sceptic to a convert overnight when I bought a Nikon ES-2 copying attachment for dslr scanning 35mm negatives with my old Nikon D810 and 60mm micro-nikkor f2.8G lens that I already had sitting unused in a cupboard.  My son had put together his own Sony-based 35mm scanning set-up with an Essential film holder and was getting perfectly good enough results to persuade me to try it for myself ( he has a Leica M-A and a iiif).

Prior to buying the ES-2, I scanned 35mm on my Imacon 646 or Plustek 8300i.  The Imacon is painfully slow especially when scanning as a 3F and the Plustek is just slow with a choice of 2 equally painful UI’s.

Scanning 35mm frames with the D810 and ES-2 is lightning fast by comparison, all it takes is a few minutes  to load 6 strips of 6 frames into holders and copy them with the camera.  
 

I then have the benefit of more convenient RAW files  for post processing.

With my medium and large format films I only work on one frame at a time and my Imacon resolution is perfect for those formats,  speed is not a consideration.  
 

Otherwise I see no downside to scanning my 35mm films with the D810/ES-2 and will probably sell the Plustek.

 

You also have the option of raw DNG files with the Plustek, which is what I use.

[RayD28]

10 hours ago, Jipster said:

You also have the option of raw DNG files with the Plustek, which is what I use.

What model plustek?

[Borna]

5 hours ago, RayD28 said:

What model plustek?

It works with anyone if you use Vuescan, yesterday I scanned with 7100 and 8200i SE could use DNG and RAW

[RayD28]

3 hours ago, Borna said:

It works with anyone if you use Vuescan, yesterday I scanned with 7100 and 8200i SE could use DNG and RAW

OK.  I use Silverfast.  I tried a trial version of Vuescan and didn't get along with it.  I probably did not put enough effort into it.  Might try again.  Thanks for the reply.  

[Borna]

1 hour ago, RayD28 said:

OK.  I use Silverfast.  I tried a trial version of Vuescan and didn't get along with it.  I probably did not put enough effort into it.  Might try again.  Thanks for the reply.  

I like silverfast more than vuescan, I think vuescan is little bit messy and annoying but if you want to control the full process then vuescan is better to my opinion, you can really dig deep in the smallest details. Silverfast is for me a more easy automated process but of course you can dig deeper if needed. 

[jakontil]

On 12/27/2023 at 6:44 PM, RayD28 said:

This is not a recommendation.  I use a Plustek 8200.  I load a film strip and do a prescan of each shot (five seconds each).  If it's a keeper I do a full scan (about three minutes).  Out of two rolls a couple of weeks ago, I had about ten keepers.  The film is filed so I don't feel bad about not digitizing everything.  I have a V Scan 600 but have not used it for years.  

 

Ray did u do conversion while scanning or just scanning raw and converted in NLP, your workflow is appealing to me just for the sake’s of giving my good old plustek a run

[jakontil]

On 12/28/2023 at 6:12 PM, RayD28 said:

OK.  I use Silverfast.  I tried a trial version of Vuescan and didn't get along with it.  I probably did not put enough effort into it.  Might try again.  Thanks for the reply.  

Aahh alrighty now i understood, late to read my bad

I havent used much of the silverfast as i only scan to raw DNG and i prefer vuewscan for this purpose

i use silverfast on my V600 because it’s easier to batch process but still only raw DNG

 

[Jipster]

On 12/27/2023 at 9:11 PM, RayD28 said:

What model plustek?

8200Si. The new 8300 is apparently 33% faster. TIP: don’t use resolution past 3600dpi, which is the maximum native, non-interpolated resolution of the scanner. 7200 dpi is significantly slower (really slow) and introduces artifacts. Got the tip from the great folks at Silverfast. And they were right!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[andym91]

Many here overlook the fact that scanning a film negative is actually very simple.

 

its just light passing through a continuous tone medium, and being „ digitized „ on the other side.

Three rules for good scans..

1.Perfect flatness ( I always place a heavy book on my flatbed cover when scanning)

2.Medium to low contrast negative 

3.Never use any sharpness or USM in the scan and always scan as TIFF file.

I personally have used and sold drum and flatbed scanners since the 1990‘s and suggest that today, a humble $ 350 flatbed from Epson ( my preferred brand),can still achieve excellent results both in colour and quality as the Drum scanners of old.

Silverfast is my preferred SW but Vuescan works fine too.

DSLR Scanning?

nothing more than Humor at best  😊👍

andy

[Antonio C]

Another happy user of a dedicated scanner here (Plustek 8200i).

In the past I’ve been thinking of moving to using a DSLR to scan but was not a fan of the cumbersome set-up, in terms of space needed on my desk. The Plustek is small, basically just a box, can be stored away and won’t take hardly any space.

What really made a difference was moving from a workflow entirely based on Silverfast (a painfully slow process, even at 3600dpi) to Silverfast + NLP. I now scan an entire roll as DNG, without even previewing, import in LR and batch convert. It changed my (scanning) life.