Canon CS8800F vs. Epson Perfection V500 for digitizing film library
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.
1994136
One pleasant surprise was when I tested the Draft setting for printing: it was much faster and couldn't be distinguished from full quality. This with two photos on the disc and high resolution text.I don't miss the several Epsons (200, 320, and 800) I wore out before, all the feeding troubles, the long cleaning cycles and the accompanying absurd ink consumption.Hurrah for Canon!
1118509
For me, the trapezoidal top of the MX860 appears especially unaesthetic. The MX850 is by far sleeker. As they say, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Among all the printers currently out on the market, the new Epson printers (Workforce 600 and Artisan 800) are perhaps the most attractively and ingeniously designed. Their tops fold inward to become ADF input and output trays. Both offer WiFi. Unfortunately, their text printing quality leaves much to be desired compared to Canon's printers.
678420
I have been using the CanoScan 8800F for scanning slides and 35mm negatives. I am using an Intel-Based MacBook running Leopard 10.5.4. I used the drivers (newer) that I downloaded from the Canon site and was up and running in under 20 minutes. Very good product - especially with color slides. I have not had any need to scan above 3800 dpi myself - looks perfectly great at 2400.I had heard that the Epson was a bit slow and the software wasn't as good. The Canon software was easy to use and the alerts were helpful, in the event that I hadn't done something correctly.
105227
They both have beautiful color reproduction and both have a nice glossy finish. For durability of finish I don't know if there's a difference. I've had good success with both as far as data burning! I would probably go with the cheapest one ehin I repurchase!
1756144
I have the 8600F and have scanned 14 rolls of 24 exposure film. All but one roll worked fine. One roll some pictures look over-exposed and about half of the jpg's look like negatives. I was able to use Adobe photo elements and do a negative on it and color balance to get it to look near normal. There are still a half dozen or more that the colors are all off if I try this. If anyone has figured out a cause and/or solution, please let me know as well! Thanks.
345731
I just called Canon and asked the same question. They said that one big difference is that the 830 copies and scans double sided. (I thinks that's what they said.) The 530 does not do that.
10243
My 610 works and produces above the norm consistently, had it since 2007 and I've had HP's, Epson's , etc and what really makes the 610 shine is to scan, save to desktop, and attach to an email, documents, photos, text and flawlessy. In fact I got Canons website for upgrades for software etc. and thought why??????????????. If it ain't broke........................Good all around every day machine but a photo above 8x10 should be handled by a Canon, I believe 9000 pro or an Epson 3880 for superior print quality!
2142299
Short answer: picture quality is very good. Longer answer: The XP-810 replaced an Epson Stylus photoprinter; so print quality was important to me. Before I purchased the 810 I spent considerable time looking at reviews. Those that specifically mentioned print quality liked the quality. Some reviews were more interested in the feature list. I have printed 4x6s and dvds using the disc print capability. These look very good to me. I don't do much 8x10 as it is expensive (ink costs) and I really target creating high definition slide shows to play on blu ray players. I was concerned about the fact that the 810 didn't have 'light cyan' or 'light magenta' like my Epson Stylus did. But I haven't seen any degradation in color quality by their absence. I did like the 810's addition of photo black. So there is one black cartridge for printing regular documents and another for printing photos. So you have better blacks for photos and good blacks for regular printing. This also holds costs down.
745284
hi. 1/8000 = A77 . 1/4000 = A65 as for image quality I think there is no diference
1933274
Kathleen, I have no experience with the Epson. However, I have had remarkable success with the 9000F including its predecessor, the 9050F. The resolution of scans can be changed to fit your needs. The 9000F does not print. It sends the scans to whichever photo program you designate on your computer. You can then correct any flaws, crop, adjust color, etc. with your photo program. Hope this helps. Fritz
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.
1860152
Epson's Artisan line boasts 'light magenta' and 'light cyan' to increase the available color gamut... but the resolution, on heavy cardstock paper, isn't as good as the Canon. I printed a batch of business cards. The Epson Artisan 710 fared better with overall color accuracy, but the Canon Pixma MP560 put out much sharper text. The Epson Workforce 610 is a bad performer; worse than the other aforementioned models - printing the same cards, at highest resolution possible, the output was grainy and to the naked eye one could see the dithering. And text quality was worse. Which is a shame; the type of ink this printer uses is pigment-based and lasts 3 times longer (300 years vs 100). But having a shiny nickel is pointless if you don't use it. In short, "My printer's ink is best!" but it's pointless if the output quality is low. About costs - they all will use a lot of ink and the net costs are comparable. Since all 3 models use separate ink tanks, you'll still save money on cartridge replacement. Since photography is a primary point, go for the Epson Artisan 710 - like the Canon it uses dye inks, which will last 100 years, but 100 years of solid color vs 300 years of visible dithering... :) (And if you need more than 8.5x11, something like the Epson R2400 or 3800 is the better choice compared to ALL of these models, bar none.)
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.
1528385
So, do you like the 800IS? Does it imprint dates on the front of the photos on all modes (higher resolution images)? Does it take photos that are fuzzy, like some people have mentioned?
1208312
I have the 3010e but the 3D did not work. There were ghost images and I had to buy the Epson brand to utilize the 3D features.
1373906
Vaboo! Good topic.I've got a box of *everything* -- 110, 35mm and 126 negatives. The problem is the software doesn't really allow for this film format . . . I'm going to see if they have a SDK or something to hack that.Any suggestions for the 110s?Also, can someone suggest a good (cheap) negative viewer? That pana-vue #2 looks perfect except it's for slides.Thanks in advance!