Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Plustek is the other very viable sounding company's name which is mentioned on that thread URL you just put up. Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > From: John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 03:45:41 +0000 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film! > > It was the medium format scanner I was talking about and I do not believe > (or > usually read) anything on the DPReview forums ;-) There are competent 35mm > scanners. > > This (start of a long thread) is the new hope for medium format scanners > http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=114288 > > john > ________________________________________ > > > The Nikons and Minoltas were made many many moons ago. > The intelligence of buying anything resembling old digital equipment > escapes > me. I think they've learned one or two things in the past half decade on > the > components which go into scanning technology. Some of which I'm sure > overlap > into what goes into cameras. > > I do see the string bad reviews on the B&H site from who knows who these > classless customers are but on the DPREVIEW I see nothing bad at all its > like two distinct parallel universes. > http://www.dpreview.com/search/?query=Pacific+Image+scanner > > If they really are bad I'm sure some company makes a decent scanner > nowadays. > Its like these people they have pictures and negatives and slides... > And they need to scan them. So who wants to make some money is there any > money in this digital photography thing? > > Mark William Rabiner > Photography > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > >> From: John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 00:05:05 +0000 >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Back to film! >> >> Doesn't mean that they are all good though. There is a new medium format >> film >> scanner due in a few months, the current Pacific Image one is badly >> regarded >> (and you have to cut 6x7 into single frames to scan). Given that Nikon and >> Minolta had done the design and manufacturing of good scanners I guess >> that >> there is only a small market which is why they stopped production? Which >> in >> turn shows why the used prices for Nikon/Minolta film scanners are still >> high..... >> >> john >> ________________________________________ >> >> I have to admit to being surprised that there are still so many >> available. I >> had very good results scanning 120 film with an HP flatbed scanner 10 >> years >> ago, and prices on those could only go down. Gaa! I remember buying a B&W >> flatbed scanner in the early 90's (only opaque scanning, no transparency), >> and >> it seems like it was about $500. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jeffery >> >> >> On Jul 17, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: >> >>> 22 different film scanners on the B&H site. >>> 70 flat beds. >>> There is a LUG myth that a scanner without the names Nikon or Minolta or >>> Hasselblad on it does not exist. And should be widely Ignored. >>> A " baseless fabric of a vision " [Tempest] >>> >>> I think a film scanner made by a company such as "Pacific Image" just >>> may be >>> able to scan film without shreading it. One made by them cost $1,399.00. >>> It's called the Pacific Image PrimeFilm 120 Multi-Format CCD Film >>> Scanner. >>> They make a dedicated slide scanner which looks good to me for $479.95. >>> I'll >>> take that one too please gift wrapped. >>> And they make Pacific Image PF7250U 35mm Film and Slide Scanner which >>> cost >>> $269. A perfect stocking stuffer. >>> My next scanner would be one of these. Brand new. From Pacific Image. >>> And I can't be more specific than Pacific. I'm sure there are some worthy >>> ones from Atlantic. >>> But I'll stick with Pacific. >>> >>> Mark William Rabiner >>>> >>>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 Chris Saganich <csaganich at gmail.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'll continue using my Minolta DiMage untill that gives >>>>> out like the Polaroid Sprintscan before. The real killer is software >>>>> and >>>>> cable compatibility. >>>> ========================================================================= >>>> What went wrong with the Sprintscan? We are still using one with an old >>>> Mac >>>> at the office. >>>> >>>> Alan >>>> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information