I've started shooting film again with an old hand-me-down SLR to practice my skills as a photograph in general, to get myself to think more about each shot before I pull the trigger and refine my aptitudes at quickly aquiring and framing a subject, shooting the right thing at the right time, all that good stuff. Basically, ridding me of the "spray and pray" method that my DSLR had forced me into taking up..

Being a big fan of Flickr and not that big of a fan of stacking 4x3's in shoe boxes, I want to be able to digitize my film snaps and post them along side my digital work online, and have high resolution copies available on my redundant drives for archiving. Most photo labs offer the possibility of scanning your negatives and burning them to a CD at the same time as developing, but I've had horrible experiences with all three places I've tried. Low quality 300dpi jpegs, that's what I get for my 7.99$ additional fee? After being disappointed by all the labs which had up to then made me quite happy, I decided to matters in my own hands and do it myself, so I bought the Plustek Opticfilm 7200.

What brought me to buy this model is the price mostly. As a DSLR user first and foremost, I had no intention of setting myself back 500$+ for the offerings of Minolta or Nikon, yet I still wanted something powerful enough to make my film scans worthy of posting online. At 250$CAD shipped, this little puppy is just what I've been looking for: a simple yet powerful high resolution scanner that won't hold me back from investing more money in my digital gear. 

Out of the box, I'll be honest, this looks like a very cheap device. While the plastics are sturdy and the entire unit feels well built, it's presentation makes it look like something you'd buy from Walmart for a couple dozen bucks. If Plustek was looking for a minimalist look on this product, they are spot on: three buttons on a dull gray box just under the size of a loaf of bread, with holes on both sides for the film/slide holders. 

The setup was very easy. Even the most computer illiterate will be able to plug this thing into his/her computer, and installing software is the usual "Yes, Ok, Finish" business. Once you get the hang of the software, and that shouldn't take any more than 10 minutes or a couple of test scans seeing that the software is so simple it's idiot-proof, you're set. 

My initial test scans were very disappointing. Your biggest enemy while scanning is dust, and since this scanner is the entry level model, it has no special features that help you get rid of the problem, like infrared scanning and specific software functions. In a dusty environment like my dorm room, where the vents spit out very fine dust, getting the slides dust-free is very difficult. 

This is where neophites will want to return their product: there is lots of preparation and post-processing involved if you want to get great shots out of this thing. Specification-wise, I don't think this device has any direct competition in terms of value, there is just a lot of work to be done to get the most out of it.  

Preparation is not all that hard, but still takes some practice. There is lots of talks on internet forums about using compressed air, and there is no reason why that should not work. But in an environment like mine where I can't have a compressor at my sides all the time, getting some compressed air is tricky. Canned air is readily available, but at the quantities of film that I scan these days, it just isn't an environmentally-friendly solution. My current tactic involves gently wiping down my negative with high concentration isopropanol on a soft microfiber cloth, and immediately transfering the film to the holder for scanning. Despite using latex gloves to prevent accidental smears of transfer of dust/dead skin on the film, there will always remain a certain amount of fine dust particles.

This is where the software supplied has certain limitations: it is useless at removing dust from your scans. Color correction is quite accurate and can be manipulated on certain parameters that should satisfy the amateur, but the fact is that all in all, the software is incomplete. Software like Photoshop or Lightroom (or both in my case) that have "heal" tools are necessary to get rid of this last bit of pesky dust, and as we all know, that software isn't anywhere near free.

Once you put in the effort though, the final products look surprisingly good: some of the shots I've taken on pretty cheap film with chunkier grain would still look awesome on prints as large 16x12. You can find many full resolution samples of frames scanned with the 7200 on Flickr, there is even a group and photo pool dedicated to this scanner, on which I post all my published scans. Search the Flickr groups for "plustek" will most likely get you some quick results. Be aware though that not everyone goes through the complex de-dusting process, and that some captures were made from film over two decades old, so don't let just one sample do all the talking.

This scanner is an excellent tool for the occasional 35mm photograph or the person willing to back up precious memories mounted on transparent slides, IF AND ONLY IF that person is willing to put the effort necessary to get good results. If you are not wiling to put in time in preparation and post-processing, Plustek offers a full line of film scanners with more advanced feature sets and a heftier price that may cut off a bit of your workload. After scanning 4-5 rolls, the entire prepare-scan-post process takes me around 15-20 minutes per image for results I am happy with. Take that into consideration when comparing potential purchases.

Recommended: Yes

Amount Paid (US$): 219
Interface: USB