I have had nothing but quality scans from my Plustek, I am happy with it. I am not a fan of Digital ICE (I don't use it on my V500) so the lack of it on the 7200 does not phase me. Not that it fails to work (well, sometimes it takes some coaxing and restarting), but it's a real PITA to work with. I'm now using an Epson V500 and lovin' it.įunny, I've had no problems with my Plustek, but I always sigh when I have to use my Epson 4490. I sent it in for repair, it was fixed for a while and eventually went bad again. Yeah, the only thing I wonder is, would it be worth getting a dedicated 35mm scanner and then later a flatbed for MF. Looks like my scans (or my negatives!) were overexposed, and the saturation was bumped up too high. Just revisited my scans and played a little in Lightroom and think that I can get better results. I'm using Silverfast, and tried a couple of different profiles including UC100 and Ektapress. I have not heard too much bad about the scanner but I do believe thy have pulled out of the U.S. You can't use ICE with Kodachrome I found out because it is like B&W with the grain.
I shoot more B&W than colour and I really like how my B&W scans turned out.Ĭertainly don't regret getting the scanner, although obviously if I ever want to move to medium format it's not going to work for that.Īre you using silverfast? If so, I find the Ektapress Plus preset works fairly well for Ektar. My only attempt at scanning colour negatives didn't go so well but I think that's because I just don't like the look of Ektar (none of it ended up on my stream). I need to work a bit harder on getting the dust/hairs off the slides though. Kodachrome is a little harder (just had the one roll to try so far) but I think I got nice results out of it. I've not tried scanning that much film yet to be honest (and very little is on my stream) but I thought that Velvia scanned really well using it. I've got the OpticFilm 7300 (practically the same scanner as the 7200). Of course, I have no idea what the quality of the various slides was. Seems sort of like a mixed bag in terms of the quality of the results. No direct experience with Kodachrome, though. Scanning dense slides can be a struggle with it - particularly something like Velvia, although even Ektachrome can be hard depending on how it's exposed and what the subject is. How well does this scanner scan Kodachromes (or E-6 slides for that matter.) Any good links to point me to? I shoot mostly 135 these days and I could always just scan prints of the MF or rig up some other device so that's not my main issue. I know it can't scan MF, 127 or 127 and I can live with this until I get the room for a flatbed. I'm looking at a film scanner as opposed to a flatbed as I hear that this would be a lot better for 135 plus I don't have the space right now for a big flatbed.
I shoot a lot of different films but I have shot plenty of Kodachrome. I'm having just as much (maybe more) fun doing this as shooting with my digital outfit.So I'm looking at getting a film scanner and I was looking at the OpticFilm 7200 from Plustek. So far I've loaded something just under 80 or so images to this folder. Scanning at 3600DPI I get a 17-18MB TIFF file that I process in Adobe Camera raw and wind up with 8-10MB highest-quality jpeg's. Seems no worse than the Canoscan 4000FS scanner I was using in the early 2000's.
I'm using the included Silverfast software, with the upgraded ability to do multi-pass scanning and have been very impressed.
I recently picked up a classic Contax rangefinder outfit and am now processing my B&W film and scanning as I go, so I never expect to have more than maybe 2-4 rolls in process at any one time, so the manual frame advance is no big deal. I didn't buy this to scan 10,000 negatives/slides shot between 19. It does not have the digital ICE option, but I'm only scanning black & white images so didn't really feel the need to spend on the high-priced models. Bill, I picked up the Plustek 8100 a couple of weeks ago.