←back to thread

251 points QiuChuck | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.2s | source
Show context
sbszllr ◴[] No.45892481[source]
As someone who has a mirrorless scanning setup for my film, and pondered getting a dedicated scanner... the price of this is quite steep given how inflexible of a tool it is.

A second hand DSLR setup is going to be roughly the same price or less. I'm also not sure what kind of workflow improvements it actually offers. If you want fancy and experimental, filmomat has arguably a more interesting but pricier offering.

But naysaying aside, I hope they manage to find a niche that allows them to survive as a company, and keep the analog photography revival alive.

replies(4): >>45892677 #>>45892703 #>>45892752 #>>45893614 #
deinonychus ◴[] No.45892703[source]
I almost missed the price. Wow you're right that's a lot! And the final retail price is 1599 euros. I have a good Plustek that cost me $300 or $400. Automated transport and unantiquated software sounds nice, but those features are not worth an extra $600-1,100 to me.

Am I missing something or is this supposed to be in another tier of image quality?

replies(3): >>45892857 #>>45894628 #>>45895620 #
ZeWaka ◴[] No.45892857[source]
It's actually a lower DPI and no IR sensor.
replies(1): >>45893445 #
gorgoiler ◴[] No.45893445[source]
Honestly I feel like anything beyond 5 megapixels per frame is pushing beyond reasonable expectations with 35mm. This is certainly the case with any kind of available light or high speed work in silver-halide process, the area where I figure most people are going to be using this device. Lab-work in C41 and E6 is definitely possible at home but must account for single digit percentage of the home analogue market.
replies(4): >>45893584 #>>45893657 #>>45895651 #>>45898650 #
jaffa2 ◴[] No.45895651[source]
I digitise a lot of 35mm.

A 36Mp camera is not enough to best a 4000ppi scanner. You need about 60-70 mp to resolve the detail of a scan to similar level .

Even a layman can see the difference at 100%

replies(1): >>45896214 #
turnsout ◴[] No.45896214[source]
A 4000 DPI scan of 135 gives you 21 megapixels. So 36MP with a good lens will easily resolve just as much detail. There is not 60-70MP of information in a 4000 DPI scan, period.

For most films, anything beyond 4000 DPI is just going to help resolve the grain particles or dye cloud shapes. You have to be shooting slow fine grained BW with the best lenses to need more.

replies(1): >>45897222 #
1. buccal ◴[] No.45897222[source]
For me real grain looks much better than digital smoothness. That is important for big prints.