Pacific Image 7250u and 7250Pro3 any good ?

[teos]

<p><a href="http://www.scanace.com/en/product/pf7250u.php">http://www.scanace.com/en/product/pf7250u.php</a><br>

<a href="http://www.scanace.com/en/product/pf7250pro3.php">http://www.scanace.com/en/product/pf7250pro3.php</a><br>

anyone with experience with these? The Nikon and even the Minolta Elite 5400 are too pricey . the PI 7250u could be a solution ;it provides 14MP files from 35mm film (the Pro3 is sayd to make 18 MP files).<br>

Could these be a good alternative to a SH CanoScan FS4000US ?</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I wouldn't, because first the image quality isn't that great, and second it doesn't feed the film - you need to reposition it by hand for each frame. Instead, see if you can find a Minolta older than the 5400 or look at the Plustek scanners. They're not generally as sharp as Nikons or Minoltas but you can buy them new, they're not incredibly expensive and they have proper film handling.</p>

[teos]

<p>Thank you ,Andrew . On <a href="http://www.ScanDig.com">www.ScanDig.com</a> they say that the best results are obtained using the Silverfast soft , far better than the original fctory soft.<br>

The Plustek 7200 seems on par in image quality ,after the same site.<br>

What about the FS 4000 Us from canon ? I know , it's very slow ,but about the image quality does it compare with the Minoltas ? </p>

[andylynn]

<p>It's similar. If you can get one it should be fine, but use Vuescan software with it.</p>

[Mike Howard]

<p>The Plustek 7200 is hand fed as well, you scan one frame, then reposition. It does a respectable job, though. I can print up to 8x10 and they look good. It is a leisurely activity, to be sure.</p>

[teos]

<p>I have the information that the Plustek 7200 provides huge files of 70 MP but only ( ! ) 15 MP real optical resolution , so that means that the files have to be downsized to the real resolution. That meas time and a lot of memory .<br>

Michael, 8x10 means aprox 19x25 cm ?</p>

<p>There is another version of the Plustek named QUATO Intelliscan 5000 , with 5000 dpi (vs 7200 of the Plustek) ,but with the same real EFFECTIVE resolution of 3300. That means lower space on the hard disc , and the same qulity image .<br>

It's provided with the SILVERFAST Ai 6.6 Studio in a package of 359 E</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>The FS4000US is quite close to the Coolscan V/5000 for scan quality and resolution. I own both. If you get the Canon you need a SCSI card and Vuescan to get the most out of it.</p>

[teos]

<p>Thank you , Roger, for your feed-back .Very useful . Such a device can be adapted on a laptop?</p>

[andylynn]

<p>The Plustek is hand fed? I give up. Buy used. Canon, Nikon or Minolta.</p>

[teos]

<p>The plustek and the PI 7250u are manual fed<br>

I am kinda leaning towards the Canon ; I hope they are servicing the <strong>fs4000us</strong> even if they don't make it anymore ?</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>I use my FS4000US with a 5 year old Dell laptop. I got an Adaptec SCSI card that goes into the cardbus port. It works well.</p>

[robert lee]

<p>The 7250U looks like the 1800U I bought years ago. If nothing substantive has changed over this time, expect "disappointment."</p>

<p>Take it for what it's worth, with free advice being exactly that: the 1800U was neck to neck either the worst scanner on the planet, or the worst thought out and worst built consumer gear on the planet. I'm getting pissed off all over again just thinking about it.</p>

<p>I'll leave it at that. </p>

[teos]

<p>Thanks,guys !<br>

I spotted now a Minolta Dimage Multi (not the Pro version) with 2850 dpi (around 10,8 MP) but NO ICE . very good price.<br>

Does it worth it?</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Well what is the price and what connections and software is with it? What operating system are you using?</p>

[teos]

<p>Windows XP ,USB on a Lenovo R61 laptop , the price around 150- E ,it has the Minolta software <strong>SCSI Karte, SCSI Kabel, Netzkabel, CD mit Software Dimage Scan</strong></p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Good price I would get Vuescan to go with it and use it for all my B&W...</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>Anything with no ICE is a serious pain in the neck for color film. If you're doing silver-based B&W only then there's no benefit from IR cleaning.</p>

[stb]

<p>Guys, the 7250 is motor-fed. In fact, it can feed and batch scan the entire film.</p>

[ted_marcus1]

<p>I'm still using the Canon FS4000US that I bought new in 2003. I'll certainly agree that VueScan is a necessity with this scanner, and also that it's faster with SCSI than with USB. USB was in its infancy when the scanner was designed, so it uses the old slow 1.1 version.<br>

However, you might be stuck with USB if you have a new computer. I recently replaced my five-year-old computer with a new one that's running 64-bit Windows 7. There is no 64-bit driver for my old SCSI card, and rather little support for any SCSI cards. The cards that are supported are intended for the specialized hard drives of high-end servers, and carry a commensurate price tag. They also have 68-pin external connectors, which requires an adapter or new cable to connect it to a scanner. I was able to find one reasonably-priced card that claimed to have 64-bit support, the $99 Ratoc PCI30U.<br>

I decided to try the USB interface before I ordered the Ratoc card. I was surprised to find the scanning speed faster than I expected. It's a little slower than SCSI, but not that much. I think I can live with it for the rest of the scanner's life. But if you can't, the Ratoc card seems the only option.</p>