Canon CS8800F vs. Epson Perfection V500 for digitizing film library Greetings, fellow shooters & scanners~Like many of you, I have 10 years of 35mm film to digitize - for ease of access & handling and eventual website.In perusing the scanners in the $200 neighborhood, I'm comparing Epson Perfection V500 & the Canon CS8800F.My photo lab friend said to go Canon & that 4800x9600 would be sufficient, but in the land of 'more is better', I'm tempted by the 6400x6400 & LED light source the V500 offers.Any experience/advice is appreciated!I'm on a MAC G4 OSX10.3.Happy Thanksgiving!peace. Canon CS8800F vs. Epson Perfection V500 for digitizing film library Greetings, fellow shooters & scanners~Like many of you, I have 10 years of 35mm film to digitize - for ease of access... » Read More Canon CS8800F vs. Epson Perfection V500 for digitizing film library Greetings, fellow shooters & scanners~Like many of you, I have 10 years of 35mm film to digitize - for ease of access & handling and eventual website.In perusing the scanners in the $200 neighborhood, I'm comparing Epson Perfection V500 & the Canon CS8800F.My photo lab friend said to go Canon & that 4800x9600 would be sufficient, but in the land of 'more is better', I'm tempted by the 6400x6400 & LED light source the V500 offers.Any experience/advice is appreciated!I'm on a MAC G4 OSX10.3.Happy Thanksgiving!peace. « Show Less
1028582
I have not decided as I have not heard anything to aid me. But I do have a flatbed Canon scanner that has served me well, and a Canon bubblejet printer that keeps on chugging, so am leaning to Canon.
1028583
In comparison of the two flatbed scanners a few things stick out. The Epson Perfection 5000 is editors choice at PC Mag. In all fairness the Canon 8800 is not rated. However, the model it replaced, 8600, was the previous editors choice and was top rated by Consumer Reports. Just comparing the star ratings of the two the Canon has only 4 and above rating whereas the Epson has 1 and above ratings. In written reviews the Epson seems to have more software and hookup issues than the Canon. Yet, it has better reviews on scan quality such as scratch and dust removal and better negative scans. So, what's more important ease of use or scan quality. In comparison of the two flatbed scanners a few things stick out. The Epson Perfection 5000 is editors choice at PC Mag. In all fairness the Canon 8800 is not rated. However, the model it replaced, 8600, was the previous editors choice and was top rated by Consumer Reports. Just comparing the star ratings of the two the Canon has only 4 and above rating whereas the Epson has 1 and above ratings. In written reviews the Epson seems to have more software and hookup issues than the Canon. Yet, it has better reviews on scan quality such as scratch and dust removal and better negative scans. So,... » Read More In comparison of the two flatbed scanners a few things stick out. The Epson Perfection 5000 is editors choice at PC Mag. In all fairness the Canon 8800 is not rated. However, the model it replaced, 8600, was the previous editors choice and was top rated by Consumer Reports. Just comparing the star ratings of the two the Canon has only 4 and above rating whereas the Epson has 1 and above ratings. In written reviews the Epson seems to have more software and hookup issues than the Canon. Yet, it has better reviews on scan quality such as scratch and dust removal and better negative scans. So, what's more important ease of use or scan quality. « Show Less
1028584
There is a useful post in another thread, the Canoscan 8600 vs. 8800 discussion--Vijay reported buying both the V500 and the 8800 and doing a side by side comparison. Canon won hands down.
1028585
I am interested in what yoiu decide. I am looking at the same two scanners, primarily to scan family slides. The reviews for the Canon seem more consistently favorable. Those for Epson seem to reflect either love or hate.
1028586
Well, as of June 2008, there is a post in the CanoScan 8600 vs. 8800 discussion by CM-Monkey (I believe is his moniker) where he reports buying the V500 and the 8800 and his side by side comparison ends with Epson V500 the winner! So, where do we go now with this discussion? I'd rather not have to buy both scanners to do a side by side comparison myself.
1028587
I went with the 8800 v th Epson v500. It has the LED lightbar - same. That's the major upgrade from the 8600 as far as I can tell. The deciding factor was poor software reviews for the Epson bundle. My profession is end-user software development. There's no way I want to deal with someone's poor UI or feature set or compatibility issues. I just want to scan my family photos. I own the full Photoshop CS so I can basically clean up anything. My guess is for the average user there should be no marked difference between the scratch and dust removal capabilities or the scan densities or lightbar output. Ease of use pays off every time you start the thing up. Hope this helps. I went with the 8800 v th Epson v500. It has the LED lightbar - same. That's the major upgrade from the 8600 as far as I can tell. The deciding factor was poor software reviews for the Epson bundle. My profession is end-user software development. There's no way I want to deal with someone's poor UI or feature set or compatibility issues. I just want to scan my family photos. I own the full Photoshop CS so I can basically clean up anything. My guess is for the average user there should be no marked difference between the scratch and dust removal capabilities or the scan densities or lightbar... » Read More I went with the 8800 v th Epson v500. It has the LED lightbar - same. That's the major upgrade from the 8600 as far as I can tell. The deciding factor was poor software reviews for the Epson bundle. My profession is end-user software development. There's no way I want to deal with someone's poor UI or feature set or compatibility issues. I just want to scan my family photos. I own the full Photoshop CS so I can basically clean up anything. My guess is for the average user there should be no marked difference between the scratch and dust removal capabilities or the scan densities or lightbar output. Ease of use pays off every time you start the thing up. Hope this helps. « Show Less
1028588
Hope you decided, because Epson just raised their MSRP price by $50. But wait, it'll probably go back down.
1198691
As someone who spent months in research (and finally decided on the NIKON) allow me to offer my advice: The NIKON P80 has a new sensor with 10.1MP (size 1/2.33" and a pixel density of 36MP/cm2). On its plus side, the small size (although it turns long when zoomed all in), the comprehensive menu and the overall built. On the minus side, the NIKON, although perfectly capable, will not take the best photo if left on Auto. The PANASONIC FZ18 has an older 8.1MP sensor (size 1/2.5" and a pixel density of 32MP/cm2). On its plus size, the impeccable LEICA lens system (and quite short even at maximum zoom), the handy joystick, the great image quality and the mechanical stabilization (the only one of these three that comes with it). On the minus side, the FZ18 is a bit larger that the P80 - and is bound to be replaced by Christmas. The FUJI S8100FD was never a contender for me. With a 10MP sensor (size 1/2.3" and a pixel density of 35MP/cm2) it is not too shabby. Yet, its overall design was not to my liking at all (of course that is a personal preference). The best advice a professional photographer gave me was this: choose the best lens and then the best sensor. Then make sure it is a camera for your level. The PANASONIC has the best lens whereas the NIKON has the best sensor (these cameras are still Point&Shoot, nowhere near the sensor sizes of a DSLR). Bottom line: if new to digital photography or do not care to be concerned with all the tweaking, go with the PANASONIC - it has a much better intelligent Auto (iA) function. If more experienced or would like to be more involved in taking a photo, go with the NIKON. Happy shooting!
153440
I am trying to confirm the Epson V500 or Epson V600 software/hardware capability to scan multiple photographs and save as separate files. Can you help?Glen
2274566
I was having the same debate, limiting my choices to the Fujitsu 1100, 1300, and 1500 because Amazon's sales rankings are often if not usually more reliable than any single review or opinion. But then I saw a review in MacWorld (the most authoritative Mac magazine) that ranked the Canon Scantini Formula P-150 above both the Fujitsu 1100 and 1500. Unfortunately, they haven't gotten to reviewing the Fuj. 1300 as yet. But given Canon's stellar reputation and performance in printing and multifunctionals, I'm now leaning toward the Canon Fromula P150. It's $259, which can't be a whole lot more than the Fuj. 1300. Here's MacWorld's review: [[http://www.macworld.com/article/1159739/canonp150.html]] I was having the same debate, limiting my choices to the Fujitsu 1100, 1300, and 1500 because Amazon's sales rankings are often if not usually more reliable than any single review or opinion. But then I saw a review in MacWorld (the most authoritative Mac magazine) that ranked the Canon Scantini Formula P-150 above both the Fujitsu 1100 and 1500. Unfortunately, they haven't gotten to reviewing the Fuj. 1300 as yet. But given Canon's stellar reputation and performance in printing and multifunctionals, I'm now leaning toward the Canon Fromula P150. It's $259, which can't be a whole lot more... » Read More I was having the same debate, limiting my choices to the Fujitsu 1100, 1300, and 1500 because Amazon's sales rankings are often if not usually more reliable than any single review or opinion. But then I saw a review in MacWorld (the most authoritative Mac magazine) that ranked the Canon Scantini Formula P-150 above both the Fujitsu 1100 and 1500. Unfortunately, they haven't gotten to reviewing the Fuj. 1300 as yet. But given Canon's stellar reputation and performance in printing and multifunctionals, I'm now leaning toward the Canon Fromula P150. It's $259, which can't be a whole lot more than the Fuj. 1300. Here's MacWorld's review: [[http://www.macworld.com/article/1159739/canonp150.html]] « Show Less
442208
I'd say read the specs and the user comments on Amazon. According to what I saw, Nikon CoolScan can scan a 35mm in 20 seconds, whereas CanoScan 8600F can do it in about a minute. Of course there are other concerns, and my understanding is Nikon has better quality in general which is reflected in it high price tag.
305388
Thanks for your review and great job on the research. I need your opinion on something. Although, the current price of the XT and and XTi is less than $200.00. difference, the List price is the XTI is twice as much as the XI. I kind of agree that the XTi isn't really much of an upgrade over the XTi and some of the superior features of the XIT I'm not really to concern about except the 8MP and 10MP. I'm not a proffesional or anything like nor I plan to do large prints, but should I pay those extra bucks just for 10MP? Please help anyone.
1691038
Michael, I own a Panasonic DMC-FZ30. If I had the money I would switch to this S100 for one main reason, that being low light capability. The 30 is limited to ISO 400, I see the 50 can go all the way up to 1600 so that may do the trick. Other than that I'm quite happy with the 30. I've had it three years, taken 1000's of photos of which I'm pretty happy. However the low light limits me quite often. The 30/50 have sensors much smaller than the s100. I think Fuji would have been better off with the large sensor they used but with 8 megapixels which would have improved photo quality, especially at the higher ISOs. The megapixel race is one of the biggest problems in the digital camera arena today. There again the 50 and S100 aren't that far apart in the megapixel race but look at the size of the Fjui sensor - wow! I would enjoy the 2 1/2 inch LCD over the 30/50's 2". I wouldn't miss the rotating feature on the Panasonic as I mostly use it in vertical modes and the Fuji provides that. Another thing I'd want is better video. Even though the three cameras have the same specs I'm disappointed with the Panasonic results. The video from my 30 aren't as good as my wife's Sony W50 point-and-shoot. I guess I'd have to hold them in my hand to compare the Fuji 100 vs the Panasonic 50. My conclusion for you? If I had the 50 in hand already I wouldn't be looking to upgrade. The Panasonic is bound to have more noise due to the smaller sensor. The Fuji looks like it has less noise but there are rampant complaints about purple fringing although most say it only shows up on hard contrast shots. The Panasonic is better at purple fringing but worse on noise - choose your weakness. Battery life is awesome on my 30 and it is indicated to be lower on the S100. Are these differences worth the difference in price (50=$579 S100=$655 9/19/08 on Amazon). If it was me purchasing today I'd go for the S100. What did you decide?
2274568
Well after reading on the canon for the last hour my only question has to do with OCR; no real reviews on how well the Canon performs in this area. There is one fairly major drawback to the Canon from what I can tell: no export to MS Word. Again I haven't tried the thing, but I've read the manual, and there is no mention of the capability. To me this isn't a big deal, I'm more worried about archiving than reformatting. The big plus of course is the apparent scan rate of 15 ppm. With that, I think I'm sold. I have the 215 ready for checkout.
1046019
The link for the comparison at cameralabs.com is not applicable because it tested the Sigma 18-200 DC prior to the release of the OS version. The OS version is much better optically than its predecessor and also includes HSM (High Speed Motor). I have read test reviews and comparisons at other sites such as popphoto that indicate the Sigma is sharper and has less distortion than the Nikon 18-200 VR, but they also state it is slightly louder. I just received my Sigma 18-200 OS today and have done limited testing, but I can tell you the AF and OS noise are not bad (the OS chirps when it turns on and off). The Sigma AF is louder than my Nikon 18-135 (w/SWM), but quieter than the AF on my Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime (wo/SWM). The HSM AF seems just as fast as my Nikon lenses. The build quality feels better than the Nikon 18-135; the zoom is smooth and solid. The first things I tested today were barrel distortion and OS functionality. Barrel distortion is present at the wide end on ALL wide-range zooms, but the Sigma controls it better. The Sigma has noticeably less barrel distortion at 18mm than my Nikon. This benefit of the Sigma is moot really, because barrel distortion of both lenses can easily be corrected with software. The OS functions very well, I can shoot hand-held down to 1/10th of a second with no blur. I will post again after I have time to do more testing.
1118343
A word about the D800. I downloaded the 20 megabite sample jpeg image files nikon provides and tried my hand at working with them in photoshop and Topaz filters. I see some color banding in the shadows, hmm? Has any one else tried working them?The other thing is that I noticed is with 36mp images at 20MB's your post processing times to slow to a crawl.
926193
You are right. I use a Micro Nikkor 55 mm f/3.5 lens. It works very well on my D800, and copies 35mm negatives and slides with a high degree of sharpness and excellent value scale (shoot RAW only).The quality is better than you would get using a good flatbed scanner like the Epson 750, and is nearly as good as what a good dedicated film scanner would give you (I use the old but famous Minolta Dimage Multi-Scan Pro with VueScan software).You would get even better results using a newer macro lens like the current 60mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor or equivalent.I reverse and adjust the values in Photoshop Curves. You are right. I use a Micro Nikkor 55 mm f/3.5 lens. It works very well on my D800, and copies 35mm negatives and slides with a high degree of sharpness and excellent value scale (shoot RAW only).The quality is better than you would get using a good flatbed scanner like the Epson 750, and is nearly as good as what a good dedicated film scanner would give you (I use the old but famous Minolta Dimage Multi-Scan Pro with VueScan software).You would get even better results using a newer macro lens like the current 60mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor or equivalent.I reverse... » Read More You are right. I use a Micro Nikkor 55 mm f/3.5 lens. It works very well on my D800, and copies 35mm negatives and slides with a high degree of sharpness and excellent value scale (shoot RAW only).The quality is better than you would get using a good flatbed scanner like the Epson 750, and is nearly as good as what a good dedicated film scanner would give you (I use the old but famous Minolta Dimage Multi-Scan Pro with VueScan software).You would get even better results using a newer macro lens like the current 60mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor or equivalent.I reverse and adjust the values in Photoshop Curves. « Show Less
910487
I am considering the 880 / 770/ or 1100. Leaning to the 880- overall I think its a better value for vacations and everyday use. I went on the canon site and di t the product tour. No mention of a movie mode on the 880. I need that- in VGa. That will help my decision. Thanks
370566
Black & White, Greyscale or Color? B&W from what I remember about that maybe a little less. Color at 400dpi somewhat longer. It's a good scanner but not the fastest on the market - especially now - but it doesn't cost an arm and a leg either. I used to scan manuals with it and structured workflow so I was doing something else as it was scanning - worked pretty well that way.
847855
A scan of a print would be a reflective print. For reflective prints, and if you never plan to scan film, pretty much any $100 scanner will perform just fine. You would see the benefit of the v500 and v7xx only when you started to scan film
1659324
I was like wow ty! Epson 3800!and i looked at the price and it was $1000+!!! oh man! o_Ois there any other printers thats good that is around $50 - $200?I'm trying to be a manga (comic book) artist and I need something that prints and scans good.What would you recommend, a printer that is also a scanner? or just buying a scanner separatly?
1302037
I would get the SD880. Mainly because it has a faster and wider lens. You can capture more of the scene in your pictures, and under lower light conditions. Also, the Digic IV processor has some neat features. The SD880 has a slightly lower zoom than the SD890. But I don't think it's much of an issue, depending on the types of pictures you like to take. Also, the SD880 doesn't have an optical view finder. If that's important to you, then you might want to consider the SD890 instead. Personally, I have never used the view finder in my previous PowerShots. I always use the LCD screen. If the price difference is only $10, why not go for something new instead of something old? Get the SD880. :-)
1178302
i got it on sale cheaper than the 2270. go with low price. the scanner copier are not worth paying extra for.