epson vs canon (scanners)... help me...

Thanks to all of you... but I need more help...

Thanks for other sugestions, but I don't want to consider the epson 3200 or the canon 9900F (and I don't want to compare them with the 3170 or the 8000F), they are more expensive than the models I want; I don't want to pay about 300€ for a scanner (why to pay that?).

And I'm not going to include Microtek. At least, here, it is a brand more expensive and difficult to get, and I don't think it to be better than Epson or Canon. (By the way, in graphic design at the university we had Agfa).

I am between the epson 3170 photo and the canon 8000F because they seem to be good quality and I don't see reasons to spend more.

I don't know if the canon 8000F has a better quality (I don't think that, because in spite of being a canon, it is cheaper than the 3170...)...

...I don't know if the epson's 3200dpi are necessary to scan films and slides... (is necessary 3200dpi to scan films?...)...
...I don't know if...

One thing: I need the scanner for all kind of documents... opaques... drawings, books... But I don´t want a dedicated film scanner. Before buying a dedicated film scanner (evry expensive), I would buy a digital camera...

Please, don't make my decision harder... don't confuse me... ))

Thanks.

aitor said:

Thanks to all of you... but I need more help...

Thanks for other sugestions, but I don't want to consider the epson
3200 or the canon 9900F (and I don't want to compare them with the
3170 or the 8000F), they are more expensive than the models I want;
I don't want to pay about 300€ for a scanner (why to pay that?).

And I'm not going to include Microtek. At least, here, it is a
brand more expensive and difficult to get, and I don't think it to
be better than Epson or Canon. (By the way, in graphic design at
the university we had Agfa).
I am between the epson 3170 photo and the canon 8000F because they
seem to be good quality and I don't see reasons to spend more.

I don't know if the canon 8000F has a better quality (I don't think
that, because in spite of being a canon, it is cheaper than the
3170...)...
...I don't know if the epson's 3200dpi are necessary to scan films
and slides... (is necessary 3200dpi to scan films?...)...
...I don't know if...

One thing: I need the scanner for all kind of documents...
opaques... drawings, books... But I don´t want a dedicated film
scanner. Before buying a dedicated film scanner (evry expensive), I
would buy a digital camera...

Please, don't make my decision harder... don't confuse me... ))

Thanks.

Click to expand...

I replied in the other forum where you posted, however; generally I find Epson to be highly rated (good quality results) for their Flat Bed Scanners as well as the better Color Photo printers.

If I were shopping for a Digital Camera, I would look more seriously at the Canon Offerings.
--
Vernon...
http://www.pbase.com/vrain

Vernon D Rainwater said:

aitor said:

Thanks to all of you... but I need more help...

Thanks for other sugestions, but I don't want to consider the epson
3200 or the canon 9900F (and I don't want to compare them with the
3170 or the 8000F), they are more expensive than the models I want;
I don't want to pay about 300€ for a scanner (why to pay that?).

And I'm not going to include Microtek. At least, here, it is a
brand more expensive and difficult to get, and I don't think it to
be better than Epson or Canon. (By the way, in graphic design at
the university we had Agfa).
I am between the epson 3170 photo and the canon 8000F because they
seem to be good quality and I don't see reasons to spend more.

I don't know if the canon 8000F has a better quality (I don't think
that, because in spite of being a canon, it is cheaper than the
3170...)...
...I don't know if the epson's 3200dpi are necessary to scan films
and slides... (is necessary 3200dpi to scan films?...)...
...I don't know if...

One thing: I need the scanner for all kind of documents...
opaques... drawings, books... But I don´t want a dedicated film
scanner. Before buying a dedicated film scanner (evry expensive), I
would buy a digital camera...

Please, don't make my decision harder... don't confuse me... ))

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

For bed scanning, the 3200 dpi from Epson is not too much. I have scanned a diapo with this scanner, and i was happy to see that it compared fairly well with my old Umax Powerlook 3. The resolution was higher, and the quality better.

Comparing the prices of the U max and the Epson i was pretty happy to discover that.

For the camera get the Canon.

aitor said:

And I'm not going to include Microtek. At least, here, it is a
brand more expensive and difficult to get, and I don't think it to
be better than Epson or Canon. (By the way, in graphic design at
the university we had Agfa).
I am between the epson 3170 photo and the canon 8000F because they
seem to be good quality and I don't see reasons to spend more.

One thing: I need the scanner for all kind of documents...
opaques... drawings, books... But I don´t want a dedicated film
scanner. Before buying a dedicated film scanner (evry expensive), I
would buy a digital camera...

Click to expand...

I have a Canon 8000F, and I'm only partly happy with it. After I bought it, I discovered the general concensus around here seems to be that while Canon makes good printers and cameras, their scanners aren't quite so competitive. My issues may or may not be of any concern to you, though...

The scan quality is very good, as is the build quality/construction, no complaints at all there. The lid stays up on its own, which is nice, and the scanner works reliably (unlike my past horrible experience with my HP 5200C scanner - I recommend staying away from HP!).

Overall, the 8000F is a good scanner, but...

My complaints about the 8000F:

1) The scanner software you use to scan images, etc. is rather awkward/ inconvenient to use compared to my old HP scanner's software (yes, the HP scanner software was good - it was the scanner hardware that stunk). My wife, who used the HP scanner regularly, had a much harder time picking up on the Canon.

2) The scan area doesn't seem to fully cover the glass area, so if you place a photo on along the edge of the glass, like I often do to help keep it straight, the last 1/8" - 1/4" of the pitcure along the edge doesn't get scanned. That's the left and right edges. The bottom edge seems to have a much bigger scan gap, possibly an inch or more, but I haven't experimented enough to know for sure. I don't know if this edge issue is by-design, or if my scanner is malfunctioning, but it's kind of annoying.

3) I discovered that for some reason the Canon scanner software can't produce scans of sufficient quality for use with Profile Prism, printer calibration software. Further, the recommended third party scanner software that would enable the scans for Profile Prism does not support the 8000F, because Canon won't document the commands they use to control the scanner.

4) After I bought it, I discovered that the advertised hardware dust and scratch remove feature was only for film scans (which I hardly do), not regular scans (99% of my usage).

I'm a Canon type of guy (3 Canon cameras, and a Canon printer), but if I had to buy a scanner again I think I'd go with an Epson.

Before you buy any scanner make sure it works with vuescan or another scanner software package. Usually the 3rd party software is better. Canon won't release the command specs on some of their scanners so some models don't work with 3rd party software.
--
Eric R.

You better check out the epson4870 with ICE. Buy your last scanner first!

aitor said:

Thanks to all of you... but I need more help...

Thanks for other sugestions, but I don't want to consider the epson
3200 or the canon 9900F (and I don't want to compare them with the
3170 or the 8000F), they are more expensive than the models I want;
I don't want to pay about 300€ for a scanner (why to pay that?).

And I'm not going to include Microtek. At least, here, it is a
brand more expensive and difficult to get, and I don't think it to
be better than Epson or Canon. (By the way, in graphic design at
the university we had Agfa).
I am between the epson 3170 photo and the canon 8000F because they
seem to be good quality and I don't see reasons to spend more.

I don't know if the canon 8000F has a better quality (I don't think
that, because in spite of being a canon, it is cheaper than the
3170...)...
...I don't know if the epson's 3200dpi are necessary to scan films
and slides... (is necessary 3200dpi to scan films?...)...
...I don't know if...

One thing: I need the scanner for all kind of documents...
opaques... drawings, books... But I don´t want a dedicated film
scanner. Before buying a dedicated film scanner (evry expensive), I
would buy a digital camera...

Please, don't make my decision harder... don't confuse me... ))

Thanks.

Click to expand...

EMAASJR said:

You better check out the epson4870 with ICE. Buy your last scanner
first!

Click to expand...

epson 4870??... I can't pay for the 3200... (and I don't know why to pay for it)... so, how am I going to choose the 4870??

ICE is everything when you scan film!
Don't settle for less; you will be shooting yourself in the foot later

Its a couple of years old, and its not the fastest, but its dynamic range is quite good (3.7?) and it scans at 2400dpi, which for scanning printined material is about all one needs (but debatable).

I use it as an OCR scanner for newspaper and magazine articles, as well as scanning photographs. Silverfast (SE) comes bundled with it at provides a lot of latitude when tweaking a photo before you scan it. I would think you might find a used/refurb one for under $200US.

aitor said:

EMAASJR said:

You better check out the epson4870 with ICE. Buy your last scanner
first!

Click to expand...

epson 4870??... I can't pay for the 3200... (and I don't know why
to pay for it)... so, how am I going to choose the 4870??

Click to expand...

--
JimKa