flat bed scanners

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by JER442, Feb 10, 2004.

  1. JER442

    JER442 Guest

    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
     
    JER442, Feb 10, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JER442

    John Welton Guest

    John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $188). 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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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
     
    John Welton, Feb 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. 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" <> wrote in message news:...
    > John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $188). 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > 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

    >
    >
     
    Steve Colburn, Feb 10, 2004
    #3
  4. JER442

    Tim Guest

    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" <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > 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" <> wrote in message news:...
    > > John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $188). 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" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > 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

    > >
    > >
     
    Tim, Feb 10, 2004
    #4
  5. What question?

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

    The scanner is USB 2.

    Steve

    "Tim" <> wrote in message news:...
    > 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" <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > > 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" <> wrote in message news:...
    > > > John, I've just installed a new Epson 3170 here (Newegg.com = $188). 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" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > 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
    > > >
    > > >
     
    Steve Colburn, Feb 10, 2004
    #5
  6. JER442

    Peter Jones Guest

    On 10 Feb 2004 02:05:52 GMT, (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
     
    Peter Jones, Feb 11, 2004
    #6
  7. JER442

    bob Guest

    (JER442) wrote in
    news::

    > 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
     
    bob, Feb 11, 2004
    #7
  8. JER442

    933 Guest

    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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 10 Feb 2004 02:05:52 GMT, (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
     
    933, Feb 12, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. G. Huang

    Flat Bed Scanner + Enlarger = Film Scanner?

    G. Huang, Jan 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    3,151
    ONiLX
    Aug 7, 2011
  2. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    635
    Mark Johnson
    Apr 11, 2004
  3. Albert Ma

    epson (or others) flat bed scanner vs film scanner

    Albert Ma, Oct 30, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    691
    Michael A. Covington
    Oct 30, 2004
  4. Morton Klotz

    Good flat bed scanner for 35mm slides?

    Morton Klotz, Oct 18, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    471
    Gary Hendricks
    Oct 19, 2005
  5. Dirk

    HP Flat Bed Scanners

    Dirk, Mar 4, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    440
    m Ransley
    Mar 5, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page