Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646  (Read 905 times)

sharperstill

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« on: March 09, 2017, 06:53:55 PM »

I thought this the most appropriate sub-forum. Moderators may disagree.
I have the opportunity to buy an Imacon 646 for a price which I think will be not so different from that which I could sell my Imacon Precision III/G5/Ratoc/Monitor for.
So an obvious question would be, in the context of it being cash-zero, or close to, is it a worthy upgrade?
The pros in my mind would be that
* I no longer would have to maintain an old computer(s) and old operating system.
* Faster scans via Firewire
* more resolution
* autofocus
The cons would be
* possible reliability issues from a scanner I don't know. It has been boxed up unused for at least 4 years.
* I may have to purchase 1 (or maybe 2) holders

Additionally, I'm not certain that the 646 can scan 13x18/5x7 film. This brochure suggests it will but several forum posts seem to question that
http://www.jvhtech.com/JVH_Info/brochure_646.pdf

Jon
Logged

Chris Livsey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 768
Re: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2017, 02:40:48 AM »




Additionally, I'm not certain that the 646 can scan 13x18/5x7 film. This brochure suggests it will but several forum posts seem to question that
http://www.jvhtech.com/JVH_Info/brochure_646.pdf

Jon

Why look at a brochure a simple search brings up the makers user's guide? :

Originals
Transparencies: from 35mm to 4x5 inches, <1mm thick
Reflectives: up to 220 x 310mm (A4 oversize), <1mm thick

http://www.dtgweb.com/downloads/docs/English_Flextight646_Manual.pdf

Edit: Just seen the brochure is from the makers!! I suppose it depends on the holder and if the film will load with an acceptable to some crop which may explain why reports are varied.

Nothing on the other questions I'm sorry.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 07:39:11 AM by Chris Livsey »
Logged

Craig Magee

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
    • www.craigmagee.co.uk
Re: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2017, 03:35:49 PM »

Precision and 646 are the basically the same scanner, except the 646 has AF and FireWire. There is no increase in resolution from MF and larger. 35mm you might have more but many later Precisions have the same 6300dpi.
Only the 848 goes to 8000dpi

It will still scan 5x7 with the correct holder.

If you already have a Precision and a machine to run it, there is probably not much point changing unless you need the speed increase.
Logged

Chris Livsey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 768
Re: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2017, 03:25:03 AM »

I note e-bay sellers with hand made 5x7 holders with limitations on the scanners that will work with that size.

sharperstill

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2017, 07:00:33 PM »


Yes the brochure and the manual contradict each other, hence my question.

If you already have a Precision and a machine to run it, there is probably not much point changing unless you need the speed increase.


One attractive part though is not having to maintain an ageing computer system to run it. I'm on my second G5, still have the old one with busted power supply in my shed (in case) and before that used a G4. So a big part of it would be to get away from having to maintain an entirely separate workstation, and an ageing one at that, and have the 646 on my desk plugged into my regular imaging machine. Also, presumably the 646 is younger than my PII.

Thanks for the replies. Going to check out the 646 later this week.
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1783
    • The Last Word
Re: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2017, 08:31:12 PM »

One attractive part though is not having to maintain an ageing computer system to run it. I'm on my second G5, still have the old one with busted power supply in my shed (in case) and before that used a G4. So a big part of it would be to get away from having to maintain an entirely separate workstation, and an ageing one at that, and have the 646 on my desk plugged into my regular imaging machine. Also, presumably the 646 is younger than my PII.

I am one of those poor/pitiable/stupid/gullible souls that paid Imacon big bucks for the II > III upgrade so I could get FireWire. The FireWire enhancement consisted of a third-party FireWire to SCSI adapter. Then, to rub salt in the wounds, when the new Mac OSes came out and I tried to update my software, it didn't work. Imacon's reply: the new software only works with FireWire devices, and that means native FireWire devices. It won't work with your II updated to a III, even though we sent you a stick-on that says III on it and you put it on your scanner thinking it was a real III. It will only work with scanners that left the factory as III's.

In spite of that, I later bought a H2D-39. Now I'm considering an H6D-100c, and the memory of my experience with the scanner is making it hard to pull the trigger.

Jim

RomanN.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
Re: Imacon PII/III vs Imacon 646
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2017, 05:50:25 AM »

The main point is that the Imacon 646 have the newest Kodak chip that have much better dynamic range. All of them: 646, 848, 949 have the same chip and the same optik. all of them could scan in theory 35 mm with 8000 dpi. Realistik is the optical resolution of them all about 6000 dpi ( 35 mm). The 646 can scan with 6300 just becouse of the software- Manufacturer restriction.
The 646 is the same late model like the Hasselblad X1. The 949 is the Hasselblad X5. Only these Models can be repaired by Hasselblad.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up