Epson scanners have good drivers, this cannot be appreciated enough.

I have a Perfection 3170 that has served me really well for many many different needs, including surprisingly acceptable 35mm film scans (although it doesn't match a 35 mm film-only scanner of course).

Do you need 4990 level performance? It's a bit pricey.

I thought it was a bit pricey, but it has received so many editors awards where the other was hasn't! I guess I could go for the 4490 or v350... Any ideas?

Well, what do you need to scan, and what for?

That makes a difference!

If all you're gonna do is scan small photos for e-mail to your family, then you might as well get a $9.95 Schlubco Razzamascan Mk. IV from Overstock.com

If on the other hand you need to do calibrated scans for Hexachrome printing, well that's a different story....

I only ever scan prints, 4x6 usually. I need something fast, and that produces a good quality scan. That is it.

To scan 4" x 6" pics and give yourself the option of zooming a fair way in without losing quality, I'd buy one that goes to at least 600 dpi.

I have an incredibly ancient HP SCSI scanner that does this - no doubt most modern scanners do a fair job - just make sure you have the resolution.

You could get a factory refurb 4990 with full Epson warranty for $337.99, see for example Amazon.com.

Even a $180.00 Epson 4490 would be overkill for what you describe,and it's a great scanner for anyone who reads the manual and notes that it has two transport locks rather than one... :O)

Here's an interesting National Software Testing Laboratory Chart that compares Optical Resolution and Maximum Optical Density for current Epson, Canon, HP, and Microtek Scanners.

I remember my old 1990s $1,500 Epson SCSI scanner, I think I paid nearly as much for the SCSI cable alone as I paid for the whole Epson USB scanner that I got next... :O)

Thanks mate, you have been a great help! I am gonna go for the 4490 and save myself some.

Thanks again.

Hi all,

I was wondering if I might be able to get some quick advice. I am now considering the new CanoScan® 8600F over the Epson Perfection 4490. The only review I have read was the PC World one and they really liked the unit. Any ideas?

Thanks.

PC World is hardly the ultimate authority on this, but the 8600F is just as good as the 4490 for scanning prints.

For scanning film, the 4490 would be the choice because of the deeper density range capability of the Epsons. This doesn't matter for paper scans, as paper is limited limited by the paper surface and inks.

Personally, I've had very good results with the Canon LiDE series of scanners, they uses RGB LEDs instead of a cold-cathode fluorescent lamp. (I have a pile of old HP and Epson scanners whose fluorescent lamps are just used up.) I suspect the LEDs on the Canon scanners have an incredibly long life. I've got two of the LiDE scannners and they just keep on going. They also takes their power directly from the USB 2.0 port, so no separate power supply is necessary. The scans look great and the CanoScan driver software is very good. (HP scanner software is evil!)

Even the inexpensive LiDE70 scanner has 2400 x 4800 dpi optical resolution at 48 bits. It's available from NewEgg for about $75 delivered to your door.

CanoScan LiDE70 from NewEgg

The LiDE 600F is 48 bit 4800 x 9600 dpi optical and will scan slides and negatives. It goes for about $160 delivered from NewEgg.

CanoScan LiDE 600F from NewEgg

John

John,

What did you do to those old HP and Epson scanners to use up the cold cathode lamps? Thousands of hours each weren't enough for you? Power surges?
Something else?

FWIW, using the dang things since the early '90s...

Transparency scanning is very cool, *IF*, whomever processed your film puts them in sleeves, or at least you take steps to reasonably care for them, using sleeves for storage, using the appropriate cleaners when needed, work in a pretty dust free area. You're magnifying a tiny image - dust and scratches right along with it.

If you might scan negatives/slides every once in a while, or aren't doing pro work, you might get away with one of the built-in slide adapters on a flatbed. Otherwise get a dedicated slide scanner, checking pro & semi-pro user reviews 1st -- there's some really awful brands out there. Mention this 1st because transparency adapters, like bundled software, are often just a marketing gimmick.

For flat bed scanners, the 1st thing to consider is what you're going to use it for, and how often. If you intend to scan photos processed at the local drug store, not sent out, you're interested in color accuracy but probably not dpi. You might get MUCH better value picking up a cheap all-in-one printer on sale. The quality level of the prints just make a big investment impractical. The reason for higher *optical* dpi is to enlarge the picture, & with cheap prints there's not enough detail to make it any different than enlarging purely in software.

If you're thinking about spending a lot of cash, check the life expectancy of the bulb, if you can buy one, how much it will cost, & if *you* can replace it. The LED units John talks about are cool, but make sure about scanning accuracy. For most all scanners internal bit depth is important, as is the bit depth of the conversion to digital if available (usually on more expensive units).

Big brand names usually equal higher cost, perhaps nothing else -- it's kind of like buying a T-shirt at K-Mart versus Lord & Taylor -- so if you get a chance at a deal on a scanner with decent reviews, don't pass it up just because of the name. Definitely don't overlook Visioneer & Microtek.

Some scanners have hardware film grain &/or dust/scratch removal, which is cool if you want to pay the price. It's a toss up I think when it comes to whatever else ships with the basic driver set -- generally you want to capture the max data, unaltered, so you can do your work in P/Shop or wherever... Filter your data first, & you have less to work with, plus you're just not going to get the same quality as you will using P/Shop & optional plugins. Normally don't even want/use the BS scanning apps that come with hardware -- just scan directly into P/Shop or whatever using the driver interface.

Finally, be practical. Read the reviews. Be realistic about the quality of whatever you're going to scan -- a $400 scanner IS NOT going to do any better than something you pick up for less than $50 on sale when you're scanning low quality prints. Whatever you buy, the manufacturer is going to end driver support, usually before your scanner's worn out. Scanners are NOT airtight, so eventually you'll have dust problems on the inside of the glass -- if you're not the type to take it apart for regular cleaning, buy something you're comfortable throwing away.

@Coursedesign
"I remember my old 1990s $1,500 Epson SCSI scanner, I think I paid nearly as much for the SCSI cable alone...."

hehehehehe.... Not sorry to see those days pass at all! Had an SCSI extension cable that I held onto for years & years... every time I should have tossed it out, remembered how much I paid for the durned thing, and couldn't bring myself to do it. ;?}

Mikkie,

Good post!

For anyone contemplating buying (or even renting) a Minolta 35mm film scanner, think again.

I rented one last year to scan some of my past work. I'm at a loss to choose which was worse, the software or the hardware. Extremely irritating in every area, and the end result wasn't that much better than what I'm able to get with my Epson 3170 Photo flatbed scanner with the film adapter. This scanner has about the same Dmax as the Minolta film scanner, which is a good start.

I have actually used 35mm film scans from my 3170 for two pro jobs, absolutely OK with very satisfied customers. All I can say is that it is surprisingly good, and in some cases you won't be able to tell the difference between that and a the output from a dedicated film scanner.

For 35mm film scanners, I think Nikons are still the ones to beat (even though I'm a Canon guy for cameras, generally speaking but not 100%).