The Opticfilm 135i turned up well within the quoted delivery time. If anyone is interested IвЂ™d just like to pass on what IвЂ™ve found out since opening the box. IвЂ™m not putting this review up claiming anything like the standards that ScanDig or Imaging Resource have produced in the past. Surely over all of the internet, there is someone who has reviewed this film scanner? Apparently not hence this article. I had looked for an independent review, but didnвЂ™t find one. To cut to the chase, I decided the specifications justified the price and I put in the order. The price was ВЈ299, which sounded reasonable. Times change.ДЄn internet search to look for the US supplier IвЂ™d found previously showed that the Opticfilm 135i now seemed to be available in the UK, although IвЂ™d have to buy through my least favourite supplier (IвЂ™m a fan of the stuff that my taxes buy, so tend to be suspicious of organizations that are outrageously successful in avoiding paying their whack). At the time I had no pressing need so didnвЂ™t take it further. I remembered that IвЂ™d found a stockist in the US that would do the shipping to the UK at a price that would not be too horrendous after IвЂ™d paid the import duties. Back 6 months ago, when I was casually looking, UK suppliers only had the 135 listed. Then I heard of a revision to the 135 scanner вЂ“ a Opticfilm 135i. It is not that I canвЂ™t afford it, IвЂ™d just hate myself every time I used it. IвЂ™d really like AF (or at least some kind of focus) but for that it seems you have to pay upwards of ВЈ700. I have found that 2800dpi does me fine for most things. What surprised me was the conclusion to the Scandig 135 review, which suggested that, while it was OK for scanning for Facebook, it did not have the image quality required for anything more.ДЄ Plustek scanner that gives fairly close to its quoted resolution without AF intrigued me. Their measurement showed resolution of 3280dpi against PlustekвЂ™s claimed 3600dpi. ScanDig even had a review of it, where it seemed to do very well on getting close to its quoted resolution (a problem with many scanners). I was aware that Plustek had introduced a new вЂ135вЂ™ film scanner, with motorized film advance. Advancing frames individually does not sound attractive. It is a pain to have to attend to a scanner in batches of 4 or 6. The resolutions of those Plustek scanners always seemed very impressive, but they had no AF and film handling was manual. The Opticfilm seven-thousand and eight-thousand scanners were on the shelves of bricks-and-mortar camera stores like Jacobs, Jessops and Calumet. Plustek are (or where) far more familiar in the UK. On ScanDig they really like the Reflecta scanners, with the AF & whole-roll handling RPS 10M being the poster-boy, but that is expensive. Good sources of scanner reviews are ScanDig and Imaging Resource. I say familiar with, but really, I mean that IвЂ™ve read some reviews of. The main brands I am familiar with are Plustek and Reflecta. All the while, nagging in my mind was the knowledge that even the newest of the old-school AF scanners are 17 years old. These are fine scanners, and some models are not quite in the ridiculous price bracket of the Scan Elite. I did look at some of the Canoscan and Coolscan options. A plug-and-play film scanner can produce you a usable result in minutes. While IвЂ™m an advocate of using a digital camera to photograph negatives, it can take time to set up properly. Film holders for the Scan Elite models are like hens teeth and those who own them know it. A basic scanner that used to sell for ВЈ40 on Ebay, starts off at ВЈ90 and the bids then go through the roof. Those Scan Duals are good, but too many people know that. My current standard is a Dual Scan III, but it does get quite heavy use and is showing signs of age. Minolta film scanners have served me well over the years. I recently found myself in the market for a film scanner.

Plustek slide scanner