Plustek Opticfilm 120 Pro Multiformat Scanner coming soon

[Tom Kershaw]

But considering the amount of utter crap, and hopelessly conceived concepts that is on the market today, I’m surprised no one has actually attempted it.

Any that you would care to mention?

 

[Helge]

Any that you would care to mention?

Well I was just thinking electronics in general.
But scanners can fit under that too.

All flatbeds are just ridiculous and the Epson V7/8XX vastly overpriced, even used.

The Opticfilm/Plustek scanners are just warmed leftovers of decades old tech and ideas of how a scanner should be designed and work.

 

[cb1]

I'm all in! If I still have a job, I'm getting one. Curse you Covid-19!!!

 

[MattKing]

You would easily be able to make such a device scan at 8000 dpi, which is kind of agreed upon to be a good starting point for most film (though of course there is film stock out there, that warrants far higher resolution).

In order to make 26" x 39" prints from 135? A good starting point?

 

[jtk]

It will be interesting to see when Opticfilm/Plustek Version 2 is "announced" on this Forum..

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Judging by the history of everything Plustek has ever said and/or promised they could as well skip the V2 and start working on V3 already. Same applies to virtually all scanner makers though. An old lady with a new lipstick is still that same old lady.

 

[Helge]

In order to make 26" x 39" prints from 135? A good starting point?

It takes a good lens, a tripod and optimal aperture.
But with something like one of the famous 24 mm from Minolta or Nikon, or a macro lens, you will be able to make a discernible difference up to about 8000 dpi or about 85MP in 36x24, on Ektar and Portra. More with TMax with good development. And double up (probably) with CMS 20 II.

Even with sloppy everyday technique, you still use the resolution to not have grain aliasing.

 

[Henning Serger]

Meanwhile more details are presented on their website:
https://plustek.com/us/products/film-photo-scanners/opticfilm-120-pro/index.php

Looks very promising "on paper".
Curious to see when it will be really available, and then of course extremely curious to see the test results.
If it is really the "Coolscan 9000 successor" we all hope for, that would be great news.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[destroya]

Amazon shows 4 left in stock. supposed to arrive the 14th and ship then. I will be watching for some real world reviews. $2200 with free shipping. hope it is well received in the market and hope they can keep the scanner in stock.

john

 

[mshchem]

Only goes to 6x12. I have a 6x17. I have a beautiful Zone VI VC head on the Zone VI type 2 enlarger. If I want to print color I'm out of luck. I will send it to Northeast Photographic. I have fancy digital cameras. I need to learn how to make use of them.
I'm not buying another scanner.

 

[mshchem]

I've mentioned my workflow on some other forums ad nauseam but I use a Panasonic S1R in pixel shift to scan. I do this on formats from 35mm to 8x10 and the results are excellent. My target resolution for any of these formats is usually about 100mp so that allows me to do a downsample from the native scan capture. With stitching techniques I could push it much farther but I only have a 24" printer, and have yet to have a request for something larger. I would hope that enough people can keep those drum scanners running because I would agree that there are certain areas where they do a better job, specifically those extremely high resolution figures being one of them. On the other hand, a friend who makes Tango scans was just telling me a full drum of 6x6 frames (something like 20 frames or + or -) takes 13-14 hours for 6000ppi scans.

Pixel shifting / multi capture sensors are IMHO the way to go for scanning. Using a Phase One 150mp back I'm sure creates a lovely image but a 24x36 sensor from Sony can make a non-bayer interpolated file that is north of 200mp with much less cost and complication. However, I'd be interested in trying the Fuji GFX100 which will make a 400mp pixel shifted file.

But again, I come at it a bit differently than most people. My needs are 360dpi print at 24" in the short dimension. Not much! But...realistic.

I have a Nikon D850 and the D6. Is "Focus stacking" useful! I have yet to stich anything other than a button on a shirt. I have glass less carriers for everything upto 8x10. I have a nice printer that will go 17" wide.
I'm tempted to just experiment with the D850. This is what I despise about trying to bring analog into digital. I've seen photos that guys have done with cropped sensor Nikon DSLRs using HDR multiple shot approach making murals that are amazing. So I always come back to the same place if I shoot film, I end up in the darkroom.

I would like to be able to scan upto a 6x17 roll film and upto 8x10 sheet film either using a macro setup with a DSLR or a scanner. I think the best approach for me is to use a copy stand and a DSLR with a proper lens and like NASA does with their darn rovers, snap several images and stich together the big picture. Put the original, back lit, and move the original around until I have good coverage. I would need everything dead on level etc. Light source would need to be right?

The simplest and expensive approach would be to order LED light sources for my 2 Zone VI enlargers from Heiland, but even I'm not that crazy.

One other thing is time. Maybe just wait until Sony comes out with "Scanman Portable Personal Electronics" $125.00

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I have a Nikon D850 and the D6. Is "Focus stacking" useful! I have yet to stich anything other than a button on a shirt. I have glass less carriers for everything upto 8x10. I have a nice printer that will go 17" wide.
I'm tempted to just experiment with the D850. This is what I despise about trying to bring analog into digital. I've seen photos that guys have done with cropped sensor Nikon DSLRs using HDR multiple shot approach making murals that are amazing. So I always come back to the same place if I shoot film, I end up in the darkroom.

I would like to be able to scan upto a 6x17 roll film and upto 8x10 sheet film either using a macro setup with a DSLR or a scanner. I think the best approach for me is to use a copy stand and a DSLR with a proper lens and like NASA does with their darn rovers, snap several images and stich together the big picture. Put the original, back lit, and move the original around until I have good coverage. I would need everything dead on level etc. Light source would need to be right?

The simplest and expensive approach would be to order LED light sources for my 2 Zone VI enlargers from Heiland, but even I'm not that crazy.

One other thing is time. Maybe just wait until Sony comes out with "Scanman Portable Personal Electronics" $125.00

That's just over complicating it a bit I think. If you wanted to do ultra large prints (> 44") then yes you would definitely want to stitch. But for normal sized printing up to 24" 1-2 captures is all you need.

First of all HDR is just not necessary with negative films. A modern CMOS can capture the usable dynamic range of your average negative. Every time I've tried to use an HDR technique I end up just lowering the contrast to oblivion. A pixel shifted capture has so little noise that even extreme shadow recovery reveals clean details.

As for capture lenses, good modern macro lenses are sufficient. Keep in mind we're using them at the sweet spot aperture and they're designed for flat field work. The Sigma 70mm 2.8 ART is sharp corner to corner at 5.6. Even if there was some vignetting from the lens (and not from the lens used to capture the film image which is usually the case), the ability to do recovery is so easy.

The Heiland Tri-Chromatic LED would be useful for experimental captures but not practical work. I have one, and for scanning I use the Kaiser Slimlight. Doing tri-color capture with a DSLR would be so time consuming that at that point I might as well have just bought a freaking Tango scanner.

All you need is a good copy stand, a 95+ CRI LED, a good macro lens, and a good capture camera. I personally recommend cameras that can do Pixel Shift because it's ideally suited for scanning, and it works well. I have not used a laser alignment tool on my copy stand, but my scans appear sharp corner to corner.

 

[mshchem]

Thanks for the info. I have everything I need, just need to try it.

 

[Ernst-Jan]

Meanwhile more details are presented on their website:
https://plustek.com/us/products/film-photo-scanners/opticfilm-120-pro/index.php

Looks very promising "on paper".

I hope to read your review on paper quite soon
I live close to the NL/D border, a new PhotoKlassik is a reason for a day out by train to buy it at a train station
Yes I know, they also send the magazine also to NL, but this way is more fun

 

[Henning Serger]

I hope to read your review on paper quite soon
I live close to the NL/D border, a new PhotoKlassik is a reason for a day out by train to buy it at a train station
Yes I know, they also send the magazine also to NL, but this way is more fun

Danke für die Blumen.....
But no, it is very unlikely that you will read a review by me soon. The Covid-19 crises has affected me severely in many ways, including economics. I currently don't have the budget for this scanner.
But you will find other very interesting test reports by me in the coming editions .

But your "Landsmann" Hans Kerensky from Limburg has already one and is running his first tests:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/29504544@N08/50219351872/

Here his first speed comparison test with the forerunner model. Quote:

"Here some times and a compare with the old OF 120 :
Desktop W7 Prof., Intel i5-6400 CPU 2.70GHz, 16 GB RAM

Old OF 120 35mm holder
USB2 interface
Overview : 42,8 sec
Ok dialog to preview : 35 sec
Scan Color 48->24 Bit
5300ppi 108mb tiff
Auto CCR, No iSRD till finished (saved) : 2m 1s
Auto CCR, iSRD till finished (saved) : 3m 28s

New OF 120 Pro 35mm holder
USB3 interface
Overview : 50,1 sec
Ok dialog to preview : 21 sec
Scan Color 48->24 Bit
5300ppi 108mb tiff
Auto CCR, Noi SRD till finished (saved) : 1m 8s
Auto CCR, iSRD till finished (saved) : 2m 30s"

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Bormental]

Flickr is such a PITA, here's the URL of the full-res scan:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50219351872_757dfb5d26_6k.jpg

 

[Helge]

Can’t say I’m impressed. Looks like the same decades old warmed over casserole, with a spot of wine and a teaspoon of salt.

For 5300 dpi the result above is frankly piss poor.
I’d guess real resolution it’s half that at most for 6x6.
Not worth the money at all in my book.

 

[Bormental]

For 5300 dpi the result above is frankly piss poor.
I’d guess real resolution it’s half that at most for 6x6.
Not worth the money at all in my book.

The shot on Flickr was scanned at 2650ppi

 

[Henning Serger]

The shot on Flickr was scanned at 2650ppi

Yes.
And a handheld snapshot with a Kowa Six on CN film is not the right basis to make a full or final assessment of the performance of a scanner in general.
It may only give a very first, very small impression. The scan speed comparison is probably more interesting.
I have only given the link to inform the members here that there is already someone out there who has started working with this scanner, and is willing to share his results. Not more, not less.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Yes.
And a handheld snapshot with a Kowa Six on CN film is not the right basis to make a full or final assessment of the performance of a scanner in general.

- I'm not sure the Fuji product listed is still current either so we don't know how old the film is / storage conditions or processing factors.

 

[Lachlan Young]

- I'm not sure the Fuji product listed is still current either so we don't know how old the film is / storage conditions or processing factors.

Agreed - and the scan looks terribly noisy - which can be from a multiplicity of factors - operator error, USM left on, inversion in scanner software etc - but 120 160NS should not be anywhere near that level of noise at 2650, immaterial of the camera used.

 

[dutchsteammachine]

Specs do look promising... will await comparisons.

Perhaps something new when my 8000/9000 dies.

 

[dutchsteammachine]

Tom, my big hope is that this new scanner finally reaches the quality level of the excellent Nikon Coolscan 9000.
Or even surpasses it (a bit).
If that is the case, then that would be really great news. I am eagerly waiting for the introduction and following first test results.

Best regards,
Henning

If the holders can actually keep the film flat that will be a huge help...

 

[Tom Kershaw]

If the holders can actually keep the film flat that will be a huge help...

Yes. This is a real problem with the Coolscan 9000. I think someone in Germany has come up with a new 3D printed film holder system for the Coolscan 9000 but I've not fully investigated this as of yet. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8xfhR6kI9IzuyBN2GUW8Mg

 

[dutchsteammachine]

Yes. This is a real problem with the Coolscan 9000. I think someone in Germany has come up with a new 3D printed film holder system for the Coolscan 9000 but I've not fully investigated this as of yet. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8xfhR6kI9IzuyBN2GUW8Mg

For the 35mm holder I put 2x4 strips in it and a clamp on both sides, keeps it much flatter than just the teeny plastic edges that wear of after a while and really do nothing.

The holders on the plustek seem much stronger, with an actual metal bar on both sides and magnets? Should do the trick with ccurvy film...

120 film is hell with the 8/9k... I am still thinking of some carrier mods that could help with flatness....

I got both the long and short glas holders, but newton rings and extra dust!