Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Primefilm over Plustek any day of the week.

 

I own a rather dated Primefilm, and thought to replace it with a Plustek that had a higher specification on paper. The Plustek was returned after two frustrating days of deathly slow scanning, poor software and softer-than-promised results.

 

BTW, all the above links go to the same non-specific 'deals' page. So I'm not sure which exact scanners you're looking at.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Primefilm over Plustek any day of the week.

 

I own a rather dated Primefilm, and thought to replace it with a Plustek that had a higher specification on paper. The Plustek was returned after two frustrating days of deathly slow scanning, poor software and softer-than-promised results.

 

BTW, all the above links go to the same non-specific 'deals' page. So I'm not sure which exact scanners you're looking at.

 

those are not the links i copied and pasted, funny!

never heard of Primefilm!

Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pacific Image is the parent company, and Primefilm is their scanner branding.

 

I think you'll find the Plustek 8200i has no automatic slide or film advance; making batch scanning a fully-attended process and painfully slow.

 

It's basically the same model I had and returned. They've just changed the number.... and doubled the price!

 

P.S. the same scanner is available a lot cheaper without the dubiously 'better' Siverfast AI software and IT-8 calibration slide. Buying the full version of Vuescan is better value IMHO.

Edited by rodeo_joe|1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pacific Image is the parent company, and Primefilm is their scanner branding.

 

I think you'll find the Plustek 8200i has no automatic slide or film advance; making batch scanning a fully-attended process and painfully slow.

 

It's basically the same model I had and returned. They've just changed the number.... and doubled the price!

 

P.S. the same scanner is available a lot cheaper without the dubiously 'better' Siverfast AI software and IT-8 calibration slide. Buying the full version of Vuescan is better value IMHO.

Thank you very much for your help!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the XA and can manage to get good results. The Silverfast is beyond garbage and gennerly great results can be had with the included cyberview, although I am a VUESCAN snob.

 

The issues with mine is focus......it's out. Not a lot. Just enough to make the centre soft and the edges sharp. Annoying. Otherwise it works as advertised.

 

If I had my time back, I would go with the XE version beceause of the focus issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the predecessor of the XE, in its European disguise (Reflecta ProScan 7200), and have been using it for well over 3 years now. It works fine for me, and so far has proven reliable. I'm using it with VueScan (bought it without Silverfast - better value indeed). Like the Plusteks, it is manual forwarding, so you need to stay with the scanner as it cannot do batch-scans. It's a bit tedious, but while scanning you can use your PC/Mac for other tasks as well, so it's not necessarily lost time :-)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like the Plusteks, it is manual forwarding, so you need to stay with the scanner as it cannot do batch-scans.

 

- According to the B&H website, the XA is capable of 40 frame batch scans. Maybe only for continuous film strips?

 

They certainly don't make 'em like they used to! No wonder working FS4000s and Coolscans are commanding a high price.

 

But then again, high-res digital camera copying is now a viable and faster alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I last looked at scanner availability over a year ago, and my impression is that most of the still-being-made scanners are single. manual loaders.

 

There was a market for scanners at the time when people were switching from film to digital, but there is just a residual market now for people who want to go from a roll or two of film over to digital. No place for purists here Many current-day shooters are "FILM, don' need no steekin digital" people disdain the slightest whiff of mixed (eeeuww) workflow. As a result, there is no longer a viable market for high-quality film scanners. There is negative (no pun) feedback in the mixture, as well.

 

Real film scanning is superior to camera-based copying not least because the latter methods involve lens distortions, curvature of field and all the other chancy elements of the copy stand, etc.

You can still find the old scanners that still work, use them until they and the computers die.As you find them you will be buying the last one in stock wherever you find one. Sort of like Elaine in the Seinfeld series (The Sponge - Wikipedia).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XA is capable of 40 frame batch scans. Maybe only for continuous film strips?

 

The XA yes (continuous film strips); my reference was for the cheaper XE model.

For what it's worth, I have a CoolScan V on loan, and compared slide film and B&W negative scans to my Reflecta Scanner. The Nikon is only slightly better (mainly in shadow areas, there is a touch more detail), and sure the build quality of the Nikon feels more solid. But I can get 2 Reflectas for the price of one second-hand Nikon. So, to me getting a Nikon just makes too little sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I last looked at scanner availability over a year ago, and my impression is that most of the still-being-made scanners are single. manual loaders.

 

There was a market for scanners at the time when people were switching from film to digital, but there is just a residual market now for people who want to go from a roll or two of film over to digital. No place for purists here Many current-day shooters are "FILM, don' need no steekin digital" people disdain the slightest whiff of mixed (eeeuww) workflow. As a result, there is no longer a viable market for high-quality film scanners. There is negative (no pun) feedback in the mixture, as well.

 

Real film scanning is superior to camera-based copying not least because the latter methods involve lens distortions, curvature of field and all the other chancy elements of the copy stand, etc.

You can still find the old scanners that still work, use them until they and the computers die.As you find them you will be buying the last one in stock wherever you find one. Sort of like Elaine in the Seinfeld series (The Sponge - Wikipedia).

 

I downloaded a podcast the other day, and it was a film centered podcast which was fun to listen to. The problem was that every few minutes they'd go on a rant disparaging anyone who used digital cameras and how unpleasant and rude the were etc etc. After about the fourth rant, I gave up. I feel like photographers are photographers whether they're using film or a sensor. Sometimes I go out with both.

 

Oh well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem was that every few minutes they'd go on a rant disparaging anyone who used digital cameras and how unpleasant and rude the were etc etc

 

- Well naturally!

Every film fan knows that the light passing through a digital camera lens is vastly inferior to the light used for film, and that digital cameras are only pointed at trivial subjects that can't possibly be 'art'. Digital photographers also never take more than a few seconds thinking about or contemplating their subject, because, of course, the digital image brings 'instant gratification', which is obviously a very, very, very.... very bad thing.

 

No, the only true way is to use a bit of celluloid coated with essence of dead-cow hoof and a semi-precious metal.

 

And I'm pretty sure that wet-plate users felt much the same way about new-fangled film users.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I have the XA and can manage to get good results. The Silverfast is beyond garbage and gennerly great results can be had with the included cyberview, although I am a VUESCAN snob.

 

The issues with mine is focus......it's out. Not a lot. Just enough to make the centre soft and the edges sharp. Annoying. Otherwise it works as advertised.

 

If I had my time back, I would go with the XE version beceause of the focus issues.

the issue with mine is also focus, but the opposite of yours, sharp in the center and out of focus on the edges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had posted this in another forum

Forums>Equipment>Nikon

Hello,

after 10+ years my nikon IV ED is giving me trouble, took it to a repair shop here in Brazil and they said they can't fix it.

we're going to Germany in december.

Anyone recommend a repair shop in Germany?

Anyone know Dostal & Rudolf GmbH in München?

We'll be near Nuremberg and Bamberg.

Thank you very much!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...