Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > flat bed scanners

Reply
Thread Tools

flat bed scanners

 
 
JER442
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners, or if
this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed scanner in
the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300 looks
like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an opinion
as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a better
value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that is
just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it works
just fine for my slides and negatives.

TIA for any help you may render.

John
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Welton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $18. So far
I like the beast.

Pro's: generally good to excellent quality scans, pretty good software,
comes with slide, 35mm negative, and 120/220 mf holders. USB 2.0, build
quality relatively good for the price

Con's: slow to warm up, noisy when scanning, can't do 4x5
negatives/positives, that's about it. I've had the software lockup a few
times last couple of days not sure if that is a software or user issue

Not a bad little flat bed scanner for the money.

good luck


"JER442" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners,

or if
> this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed

scanner in
> the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300

looks
> like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an

opinion
> as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a

better
> value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that

is
> just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it

works
> just fine for my slides and negatives.
>
> TIA for any help you may render.
>
> John



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Steve Colburn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
I agree. I just installed mine last night. Did a couple of 35mm slides. Fantastic. I now have prints from slides of my daughter
taken 20 years ago. The prints look as good (to me!), as any I've seen.

It can be a tad noisy, but compared to the 1650 Photo it replaced not as bad, and a LOT faster.

I don't know about the Microtek.

I bought mine at CompUSA for $200, local so no shipping or waiting. Newegg wanted $45 to get it here 2nd day.

Steve

"John Welton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $18. So far
> I like the beast.
>
> Pro's: generally good to excellent quality scans, pretty good software,
> comes with slide, 35mm negative, and 120/220 mf holders. USB 2.0, build
> quality relatively good for the price
>
> Con's: slow to warm up, noisy when scanning, can't do 4x5
> negatives/positives, that's about it. I've had the software lockup a few
> times last couple of days not sure if that is a software or user issue
>
> Not a bad little flat bed scanner for the money.
>
> good luck
>
>
> "JER442" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners,

> or if
> > this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed

> scanner in
> > the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300

> looks
> > like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an

> opinion
> > as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a

> better
> > value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that

> is
> > just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it

> works
> > just fine for my slides and negatives.
> >
> > TIA for any help you may render.
> >
> > John

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Tim
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
The answer is in your question, USB (1.1) has a maximum cable length
of 2m, exceed this with the use of an extention or use poor quality
cable and you will produce noise.

"Steve Colburn" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> I agree. I just installed mine last night. Did a couple of 35mm slides. Fantastic. I now have prints from slides of my daughter
> taken 20 years ago. The prints look as good (to me!), as any I've seen.
>
> It can be a tad noisy, but compared to the 1650 Photo it replaced not as bad, and a LOT faster.
>
> I don't know about the Microtek.
>
> I bought mine at CompUSA for $200, local so no shipping or waiting. Newegg wanted $45 to get it here 2nd day.
>
> Steve
>
> "John Welton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $18. So far
> > I like the beast.
> >
> > Pro's: generally good to excellent quality scans, pretty good software,
> > comes with slide, 35mm negative, and 120/220 mf holders. USB 2.0, build
> > quality relatively good for the price
> >
> > Con's: slow to warm up, noisy when scanning, can't do 4x5
> > negatives/positives, that's about it. I've had the software lockup a few
> > times last couple of days not sure if that is a software or user issue
> >
> > Not a bad little flat bed scanner for the money.
> >
> > good luck
> >
> >
> > "JER442" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners,

> or if
> > > this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed

> scanner in
> > > the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300

> looks
> > > like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an

> opinion
> > > as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a

> better
> > > value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that

> is
> > > just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it

> works
> > > just fine for my slides and negatives.
> > >
> > > TIA for any help you may render.
> > >
> > > John

> >
> >

 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Colburn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
What question?

The statement about noise? It is audible noise, not graphical noise.

The scanner is USB 2.

Steve

"Tim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> The answer is in your question, USB (1.1) has a maximum cable length
> of 2m, exceed this with the use of an extention or use poor quality
> cable and you will produce noise.
>
> "Steve Colburn" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> > I agree. I just installed mine last night. Did a couple of 35mm slides. Fantastic. I now have prints from slides of my

daughter
> > taken 20 years ago. The prints look as good (to me!), as any I've seen.
> >
> > It can be a tad noisy, but compared to the 1650 Photo it replaced not as bad, and a LOT faster.
> >
> > I don't know about the Microtek.
> >
> > I bought mine at CompUSA for $200, local so no shipping or waiting. Newegg wanted $45 to get it here 2nd day.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > "John Welton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $18. So far
> > > I like the beast.
> > >
> > > Pro's: generally good to excellent quality scans, pretty good software,
> > > comes with slide, 35mm negative, and 120/220 mf holders. USB 2.0, build
> > > quality relatively good for the price
> > >
> > > Con's: slow to warm up, noisy when scanning, can't do 4x5
> > > negatives/positives, that's about it. I've had the software lockup a few
> > > times last couple of days not sure if that is a software or user issue
> > >
> > > Not a bad little flat bed scanner for the money.
> > >
> > > good luck
> > >
> > >
> > > "JER442" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners,

> > or if
> > > > this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed

> > scanner in
> > > > the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300

> > looks
> > > > like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an

> > opinion
> > > > as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a

> > better
> > > > value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that

> > is
> > > > just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it

> > works
> > > > just fine for my slides and negatives.
> > > >
> > > > TIA for any help you may render.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > >
> > >



 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter Jones
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-11-2004
On 10 Feb 2004 02:05:52 GMT, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (JER442) wrote:

>I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners, or if
>this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed scanner in
>the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300 looks
>like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an opinion
>as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a better
>value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that is
>just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it works
>just fine for my slides and negatives.
>
>TIA for any help you may render.
>
>John


Canon 5000F. Don't take my word for it, read the review and reader
opinions on http://www.pcmag.com. That's what I went by and I'm very
impressed by this scanner.

Peter
Digital Photography Reference
http://members.shaw.ca/jonespm2/PJDigPhot.htm
Touchup, an image viewing applet (also shows EXIF)
http://members.shaw.ca/jonespm2/software.htm
Health, happiness and healing
http://www.SuperNaturalWoman.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
bob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-11-2004
(E-Mail Removed) (JER442) wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed
> scanners, or if this subject has been covered recently. I am looking
> for a flat bed scanner in the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos.
> The (new?) Microtek i300 looks like it should be the one. I am

[...]

I've got a Scanmaker 5900 and a (very old) Scanmaker 6400XL.

Microtek tech support is pretty low, or at least it was the last time I
needed it, but I really like the scanners.

It is really, really nice that they continue to support old scanners with
new drivers. Both units use the same driver.

The buttons on the front of the scanner are nice, and work well with the
driver software.

So while I have not used the i300, I think Microtek in general is a good
company to buy a scanner from.

I have 2 complaints. 1) cleaning the underside of the glass requires
taking the scanner apart. 2) the 5900 has a lamp in the lid for
transparancies; the auto crop function in the driver is confused by the
presence of the lamp, and extends the crop area beyond the photo to the
edge of the lamp.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
933
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-12-2004
I am pleased with my Epson 3170 and can't remember the magazine but a recent
review in one of the PC mags. help me decide on it.


"Peter Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 10 Feb 2004 02:05:52 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (JER442) wrote:
>
> >I don't know if this is the proper venue to ask about flat bed scanners,

or if
> >this subject has been covered recently. I am looking for a flat bed

scanner in
> >the $200.00 range, in order to scan photos. The (new?) Microtek i300

looks
> >like it should be the one. I am wondering if any of you folks have an

opinion
> >as to whether this scanner is worth the money, or which one would be a

better
> >value. I am not a pro, but I don't want to waste money on something that

is
> >just not worth it. I already have a Minolta dimage Scan Dual, and it

works
> >just fine for my slides and negatives.
> >
> >TIA for any help you may render.
> >
> >John

>
> Canon 5000F. Don't take my word for it, read the review and reader
> opinions on http://www.pcmag.com. That's what I went by and I'm very
> impressed by this scanner.
>
> Peter
> Digital Photography Reference
> http://members.shaw.ca/jonespm2/PJDigPhot.htm
> Touchup, an image viewing applet (also shows EXIF)
> http://members.shaw.ca/jonespm2/software.htm
> Health, happiness and healing
> http://www.SuperNaturalWoman.com



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flat Bed Scanner + Enlarger = Film Scanner? G. Huang Digital Photography 10 08-07-2011 03:46 PM
HP Flat Bed Scanners Dirk Digital Photography 9 03-05-2006 05:18 PM
Good flat bed scanner for 35mm slides? Morton Klotz Digital Photography 6 10-19-2005 06:43 PM
epson (or others) flat bed scanner vs film scanner Albert Ma Digital Photography 1 10-30-2004 02:39 AM
Hope not OT, flat bed scanner for 127 Ektachrome clutch@lycos.com Digital Photography 5 04-11-2004 12:05 AM



Advertisments