Reflecta RPS 7200 - any opinions?

[I.G.I.]

xtolsniffer, any news regarding the shoot out?

 

[Felinik]

In my case things didn't work out that well.

I had lots of trouble with Vuescan, Batch scanning made things crash so that was not usable, as well as the IR clean, and the Multi Pass, functions are both crashing things as well.

Ed is fully informed and have received all data I could find for him, logfiles, system logs, etc. but says he has no way of fixing this in a near future, so for me it ended up with a full refund and now I am testing Silverfast Ai Studio here.

Really sad, I actually like Vuescan a lot and would love to be able to use it, but I can't wait for months, I already have an ENORMOUS backlog on my scanning.... (up about 100 rolls in total now...)

Things works just fine with Cyberview X5 software, batch scanning, IR clean, etc. though I really want to do pre-editing of my scans to get the most out of my pics from the start and to save me time in Aperture when done.


Unfortunately I've found other people having the same problems, way back in 2010 are the first post about some of these things with this combination that I've found, on Mac OS X (I'm on 10.7.5). Maybe things works better with other versions of OS X, dunno, and have no way of testing (lots of other stuff that needs to work here so I can't change OS X version just like that).

;(


Cheers
JF

 

[Felinik]

Okay,

After testing Silverfast 8 AI Studio this weekend, I will go in this direction, soon... apparently there's a bug in Silverfast not making it possible to use the Jobmanager (this is not only with the Reflecta), that is needed in order to maintain a pre scan/edit -> batch scan workflow. However, I am in contact with the Silverfast guys, and this is a known bug to which there will be a release fixing this within the next weeks...

Apart from this, the Reflecta works seemingly flawless with Silverfast, which has loads of nice features as well, yes it cost cpl of times more than Vuescan, but it works, if Vuescan would've worked with the Reflecta, I would've stayed with Vuescan, it's an ACE software and I hope Ed one day manages to figure out how to work the Reflecta as well.




Cheers
JF

 

[xtolsniffer]

Right, the results are in (mostly). What I did was this: I took the Koren test charts at the appropriate distance (3.120m) from the film plane of cameras with a 60mm micro nikkor. I used a Nikon D700 set to ISO200 and RAW, a Nikon F4 loaded with Velvia and a Nikon F100 loaded with Portra 160. In all cases, cameras were mounted on a sturdy Gitzo tripod, and mirror lock-up (not F100) and used a cable release. All apertures were F8, and the shutter speed was varied to take into account the differences in film speed/sensitivity. The Portra results are not back from the lab yet, I'll do those later.

I had the Velvia processed and then scanned it at 7200 dpi (max optical resolution) on a Reflecta RPS and also at 6400 dpi on an Epson V700, both in Silverfast. There was a small amount of sharpening applied but this didn't affect the readings at all. I then look a close-up of the Velvia using the D700 on an Olympus bellows set with a Zuiko 20mm macro lens, giving about 12x magnification. The readings in line pairs per mm should be about right for this test chart and distance. Even if not, they allow comparison of like for like.

Here are the images. First, the test chart set-up in my conservatory. Then the D700, Then the close-up of the transparency at 12x, then the Epson V700 scan and finally the Reflecta RPS scan.

 

[xtolsniffer]

To be honest, it's not easy seeing the resolution limits from those jpg files, so here is what I see from the full files:
1. Velvia down a microscope (Olympus). I can see easily down to 90 lp/mm. You can just about see this on the full close-up taken down the bellows - don't worry about the spots here, it was on a piece of Perspex that had a funny texture. I think this is not too far from the theoretical resolution of Velvia. At a push I'd say you can see up to 95 lp/mm on the transparency.
2. Nikon D700. I can see to 60 lp/mm tops. Really, the theoretical limit out to be the horizontal number of pixels/2 for the 36mm length of the sensor, so (4,256/2)/36 = 59 lp/mm so pretty much on the money.
3. Epson V700 at 6400 dpi. I can get to 48 lp/mm before it turns to mush. This is for the Epson holders optimised for the right height. I know that scans I get can be variable, some good, then some not so good, probably due to the poor holders, so I had a number of goes and this is the best I could get.
4. Reflecta RPS at 7200 dpi. I can easily get to 65 lp/mm and at a push 70 lp/mm.

Conclusions? The Velvia on the Reflecta out-resolves my D700 (wow!) but the D700 files are certainly cleaner. The Reflecta still falls short of the resolution that can be seen on the film by some way. The Epson does a good job, and I'm sure I can do better with it with some adjustment, but the Reflecta does a pretty good job. Of course resolution isn't everything, and I shall explore further....

 

[I.G.I.]

Thank you for sharing the results. Is there any sharpening applied to the D700 file?

 

[xtolsniffer]

Thank you for sharing the results. Is there any sharpening applied to the D700 file?

No, it's just the RAW file converted to tiff then jpeg in Capture NX2. There might be some in-camera sharpening that I haven't removed in the raw file, I don't know if that's there or not. I tried a fair bit of sharpening options on the scans. I no case could I squeeze more resolution out (unsurprisingly) just improve the overall look.

 

[I.G.I.]

This is most probably besides the subject of your inquiry, but I asked because the edge contrast on the D700 is very harsh, to the point of creating thick lines on it's own. That, and the convulsive rendering of the beyond the resolution limit give really an unpleasant impression (to my eyes/mind at least). The film on the other hand, regardless of the scanning procedure, has a gradual transition from discernible lines to uniform field; and mellow rendition of contrast. This is not striking me for the first time, but I've never seen it like this, on resolution charts side by side.

 

[xtolsniffer]

I think it may be because we are actually looking so close those are the individual pixels so they appear either on or off with sharp edges. I'll check the raw file again and see if there is any sharpening applied but i think that's pretty much as it appears out of the camera.

 

[I.G.I.]

I strongly suspect such harsh edge contrast would also be noticeable when viewing an image at normal distance as strong and indiscriminate, to the point of distracting, prominence of minutiae detail. If possible later I will be very interested to see a real world image -- in it's entirety, not as big magnification crops -- shot with the D700, Ektar, and Portra; not to prove anything, but because all three differ in image rendering.

Now I will shut up as I wouldn't like to hinder the thread.

 

[xtolsniffer]

I strongly suspect such harsh edge contrast would also be noticeable when viewing an image at normal distance as strong and indiscriminate, to the point of distracting, prominence of minutiae detail. If possible later I will be very interested to see a real world image -- in it's entirety, not as big magnification crops -- shot with the D700, Ektar, and Portra; not to prove anything, but because all three differ in image rendering.

Now I will shut up as I wouldn't like to hinder the thread.

Once I get the Portra back from the lab I'll post the full images...

 

[xtolsniffer]

To make comparisons easier, here are each of the images stacked on top of one another. First the Velvia in close-up taken via a macro set-up, then the D700, then Epson V700 at 6400 dpi, then the Reflecta RPS ay 7200 dpi. I have also run some tests on the reflecta at different resolutions which shows that you're not really getting any more resolution out scanning at 7200 dpi vs 3600 dpi. I'll post those as well.

 

[xtolsniffer]

And here is the comparison between scanning resolutions on the RPS 7200. As you can see, there is no point scanning at 7200 dpi as the 3600 dpi scan captures all the detail there is to be had from the machine. Scanning at 7200 dpi and then resampling down to 3600 dpi (bicubic smoothing bottom trace) has no beneficial effect and actually loses a little resolution. Of course I haven't played with sharpening at all so far, perhaps when I get time...

 

[xtolsniffer]

I should point out that the distance on the film/sensor between the 20 and the 50 marks on the images above is around 1mm. So when you look at it like that, all digital images/scans are amazing, though not as amazing as the raw film itself which is quite stunning. On a 12"x16" print (which is about 12x magnification from 35mm) that one millimeter would be stretched out to 12mm. Ok, perhaps a little rough if you're going to press your nose against it, but from a normal viewing distance I should think it would be fine.

 

[Felinik]

I've been scanning through 6 rolls of black and white here today, prescanning, selecting the pics i want, and then I just left the scanner. For reasons regarding physical space, I cut the films in half, which then made it possible to actually just have the scanner on a normal bigger table, and work with one half at the time.

Now I've only used the Cyberview X5 software that ships with the scanner (as I never managed to get Vuescan to work with this scanner for batch scanning, shame really..). Cyberwiew is a joke in terms of features etc. but it does the job, though I can't wait until my copy of Silverfast Ai Studio 8 arrives in the mail box...

This scanner is a true workhorse, and this workflow fits me excellent, put in the strip, press prescan, wait, select pics and adjust curves (this is the bad part with the Cyberview software), and then press scan, and go do something else.

Really brilliant, though Mr. Postman, bring me my package NOW!!

 

[I.G.I.]

That is what I read elsewhere, that the maximum resolution claimed is interpolated (same for the competing Plustek model). Regardless, the Reflecta looks the best in the comparison. Can't wait to see to what degree this resolution chart superiority will manifest in real world images

 

[xtolsniffer]

I'm not sure that the maximum is interpolated, I just think it's not as good as claimed. I get the same thing from the V700, the 6400 dpi scans are pretty much the same as the 3200 dpi scans and the Epson V700 has an optical resolution of 6400 dpi. I actually doubt that in real world images there will be much of an observable difference between the V700 and the Reflecta RPS in terms of resolution, but i'll post them when the Porta comes back from the lab.

 

[I.G.I.]

I'm not sure that the maximum is interpolated....

I can't see any other plausible explanation for the fact that you double resolution to the max, and end up with a scan that is not only not better, but slightly worse... Evidently the true optical, and the maximum resolution are not the same. Indeed, I am saying this as matter of fact (commented at length on Rangefinderforums) , and have no intention to antagonise Reflecta owners.

 

[xtolsniffer]

Now I've only used the Cyberview X5 software that ships with the scanner (as I never managed to get Vuescan to work with this scanner for batch scanning, shame really..). Cyberwiew is a joke in terms of features etc. but it does the job, though I can't wait until my copy of Silverfast Ai Studio 8 arrives in the mail box...

You went for the package with the IT8 targets in? I'm trying to decide if it's worth the extra at the moment. I've tried the demo Silverfast and it seems fine, but it's a lot more with the targets...

 

[Felinik]

You went for the package with the IT8 targets in? I'm trying to decide if it's worth the extra at the moment. I've tried the demo Silverfast and it seems fine, but it's a lot more with the targets...

I paid 290 euros, it's a lot of money indeed, though I need the batch scan with pre scan functionality...

 

[xtolsniffer]

I think something odd must happen above 3600 dpi. If you use Vuescan, then any scan above 3600 comes out very light and unuseable. Ed Hamrick (of Vuescan fame) says that he has no idea why this happens. On the other hand, the scanner test at Film scanner Reflecta RPS 7200 Professional has it resolving at up to 4100 dpi in Silverfast, so it can't be just 3600 interpolated up to 7200 dpi. Who knows. Anyway, it's not unusual to have optical resolutions stated that are way above actual resolutions. I think the best reading I can get for the Reflecta is about 70 lp/mm which equates to about 3550 dpi while there is actually 90 lp/mm (about 4572 dpi) worth of information in the slide.

 

[I.G.I.]

the scanner test at Film scanner Reflecta RPS 7200 Professional

Frankly, I am extremely sceptical toward reviews by interested parties - either selling the reviewed product; or getting revenues from the manufacturer or a major retailer in the capacity of advertiser. It's the old corrupt practices of the printed press successfully transferred and updated for the virtual domain.

Regardless, Reflecta looks like the best scanner for 35mm still in production. The only thing that held me from getting one was the software: neither SF nor Vuescan worked on my system so I had to remove it from my purchase list.

 

[xtolsniffer]

If Vuescan supported this scanner under Linux I would have bought into that. Sadly it doesn't, but then neither does Silverfast. I have a dual-boot Windows 7/Ubuntu system and I only use Windows for hardware (like scanners and meteorological stations) that Linux doesn't support. At the moment I'm testing a system with Ubuntu 13.04 running Windows 7 as a guest under Virtualbox. I'm hoping to get the scanners running under Silverfast within that. As you can save the guest OS state in Virtualbox it only takes a few seconds to start up within Linux, so it'll be like running the scanners from within Linux itself. So far partial success only.
As for resolution, whatever the maximum, 3600 dpi is enough to print 12"x16" from 35mm (at 250 ppi on the printer), and that's got to be enough for most people.

 

[Felinik]

Okay, got my copy of SilverFast Ai Studio 8 today. After using it with both Vuescan and Cyberview x5, I need to add to the record that this scanner needs SilverFast, everything is all of a sudden just so simple, great results fast, and it works!! Though I gotta admit I had some problems with the IT8 calibration in the last build of SilverFast (SF-8.0.1r26(AFL)), but reverting to the previous version (SF-8.0.1r24(AFL)) worked just fine. So let's hope the next version to be released has fixed this, as well as the bug with batch/pre-scanning that is in testing as we speak.

 

[Felinik]

You went for the package with the IT8 targets in? I'm trying to decide if it's worth the extra at the moment. I've tried the demo Silverfast and it seems fine, but it's a lot more with the targets...

There's "only" one single target slide for the calibration, but instantly after calibrating my color film scan tests where SO simple to get great instantly using the NegaFix emulsion profiles!