In the Market For a New Scanner
I've had a scanner for a number of years now. I was amazed at how quickly my HP parallel port scanner (a 3200C) could digitize just about anything that fit on its bed into a digital image in the span of 30 seconds. I used it constantly for making digital backup copies of photo prints and important documents. The thing worked so well that I had no plans to replace it anytime soon even though it was one of the lower models when it was purchased.
So much for the best laid plans. Let's just say that the scanner needs to be replaced and leave it at that. So now I'm surfing and seeing what progress has been made in this area in the last five years. To this observer, not a whole lot has gone on. The interface has moved from the parallel port to the USB port. This is hardly surprising as just about everything is USB these days, and nothing interfaces through the parallel port. There are more scanners that can handle film negatives and slides; this was a very premium feature a few years ago. Then again, I'm not relly sure how essential this feature is, as I haven't shot a roll of film in five years anyway. The other new feature is some variation of a cleanup mode, like the DigitalICE technology to take scratches and dust off of negatives and slides. As I have less and less film to scan, this is of lesser value to me currently. That looks like all that has been added in quite a while for the entry level scanner market.
From the product lineups, it seems that these companies really don't even want to sell a scanner to anyone. Let's look at the HP line. The most inexpensive scanner, the Scanjet 3670, goes for just under $80. There cheapest all-in-one printer, the Deskjet F380, comes in at, you guessed it, just under 80 bucks. It's like getting the printer capability for free. I suppose the overpriced inkjet cartridges help to subsidize the cost of the all-in-one device. Once they sell us a scanner, there are no more consumables to be purchased.
In the end, I've heard better things about the Canon and Epson scanners. I'm looking to spend about 100 dollars on this scanner, which is what I paid for my last one. I could care less about a sheet feed. Maybe at least the new one will have a real on/off switch as my last one didn't; it was always on. See, there are a few features that can be added in this segment of technology.
--Jonas
Technorati tags:
all-in-one, HP, scanner
So much for the best laid plans. Let's just say that the scanner needs to be replaced and leave it at that. So now I'm surfing and seeing what progress has been made in this area in the last five years. To this observer, not a whole lot has gone on. The interface has moved from the parallel port to the USB port. This is hardly surprising as just about everything is USB these days, and nothing interfaces through the parallel port. There are more scanners that can handle film negatives and slides; this was a very premium feature a few years ago. Then again, I'm not relly sure how essential this feature is, as I haven't shot a roll of film in five years anyway. The other new feature is some variation of a cleanup mode, like the DigitalICE technology to take scratches and dust off of negatives and slides. As I have less and less film to scan, this is of lesser value to me currently. That looks like all that has been added in quite a while for the entry level scanner market.
From the product lineups, it seems that these companies really don't even want to sell a scanner to anyone. Let's look at the HP line. The most inexpensive scanner, the Scanjet 3670, goes for just under $80. There cheapest all-in-one printer, the Deskjet F380, comes in at, you guessed it, just under 80 bucks. It's like getting the printer capability for free. I suppose the overpriced inkjet cartridges help to subsidize the cost of the all-in-one device. Once they sell us a scanner, there are no more consumables to be purchased.
In the end, I've heard better things about the Canon and Epson scanners. I'm looking to spend about 100 dollars on this scanner, which is what I paid for my last one. I could care less about a sheet feed. Maybe at least the new one will have a real on/off switch as my last one didn't; it was always on. See, there are a few features that can be added in this segment of technology.
--Jonas
Technorati tags:
all-in-one, HP, scanner
posted by digitaldoc at 9:26 PM
2 Comments:
I USED to use HP products, until I found Canon printers and now Epson scanners :)
http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=epson+perfection+3590&btnG=Search+Froogle
I have that one - the Epson Perfection 3590. I never used the film strip feeder, but one of these days I might actually be non-lazy and digitize the thousands of photos we have :)
Good luck in your hunt!
Mike
Oh I narrowed it down to that Epson and the Canon..umm..8400F I think it was, and chose the Epson because the dirt and scratch removal supposedly didnt work on the Canon.
Thanks for the thoughts. I'm leaning towards the Epson at this point. I've had an Epson digital camera, the 3100Z for 5 years and been very satisfied with it. That says a lot as there have been plenty of newer cameras released.
Post a Comment
<< Home