Scanner Reviews

I got the Freedio printer after seeing it listed in the accessories catalog of my new E-115. After installing all the software, I couldn't get it to work and contacted Casio support. They informed me that it doesn't work with Pocket PC devices, because there is no task bar to activate the print routing from.

Greetings! Unfortunately I have to disagree with Neil - the FZ-500P does NOT work with the E-115. I just received it and the manual clearly states that it does only support models up to the E-105. Casio's customer support center confirms that. But to all the pre-E-115 owners: This device is sooo cool :) Just buy holding it in my hands I can tell that I would LOVE it (if it would work with my Cassiopeia). That's why I give it 3 stars (kinda to stay neutral).

Other than that: Don't Panic! (42)

When I got my E-115, I bought the portable handheld printer at the same time. It works wonders. With small companies you can print out receipt. You can make business cards on the go. Hand someone a really great looking note which the will never lose. Really it work with any windows CE PDA that has a IrDA infrared port. With 64 different shades of grey and 400 dpi this isn't one of those black and grey printers. The one problem I had was power, it chew up batteries, like a cat and mouse, it's best to buy those rechargeable batteries right away. Just think, if you ever run out of paper the Freedio stores the print command in it's memory and prints it later when you have enough paper. It makes a great partnership with the FZ-700S scanner, once a document is scanned it send it via the IrDA port and prints the document. This is a great buy.

Really can't say much except that it would lock up my XP computer. Contacted Microtek by e-mail, got no response.
Returned it to Amazon.

Fine scanner...always liked the ScanWizard software Microtek provides. Easy to use. But it's slow. Over 30 seconds to scan one black and white page at 300dpi. And it has this droning sound that vibrates your nerves - you practically have to leave the room until the page is done. Not recommended and poor Microtek site for not providing performances specs on this scanner. But for $100, what did I expect?

I was looking for something easy and I mean EASY to use. I asked the local store guy and he suggested this. It has 7 buttons on it, so i just put down my picture and press the button and it appears on my desktop. So far I like what I have bought. I bought the extended warranty as well for $10 but looks pretty solid so far. It comes with this attachment thing to do 35mm slides but I haven't got into that so far. Packs a lot of punch for well under $100. It has the new USB but I'm not sure if I have that, ohh well something to look forward to when I do!

I am an Italian surgeon of a teaching hospital and I use a computer at home mainly for educational subjects and research. I recently bought a e40 snap-scan for my Celeron 450Mhz-Windows Me-HP840C system, in order to substitute for a 5100 HP scanner who made an excellent work before a mechanical accident. Great my disappointement has been when I realized that I can not easily make a 1:1 fotocopy to send to the printer or a readible copy (of the true dimensions) of a document to send by e-mail or fax: when I try to scan and send to the printer (or fax) a document in its real dimensions, ScanWise scale it to nearly 80%, making it difficult to utilize. I rang up the Italian technical support (S.D.R. in Milan) and they told me that they were sorry but this behaviour was due to an hardware limitation (to avoid ink soil out of the paper........sic!!!) and nothing can be done. I am very upset for having select a more expensive scanner that can not make what I mainly need (a reliable and easy to use copier) and currently made very easily by any more cheap product: so I contacted AGFA Agfa tech support answered: February 05, 2001 02:50 PM EST - Agfa Support has provided a solution AGFA's MESSAGE: Dear Antonio,

Thank you for contacting AGFA Technical Support.

The problem is actually being created by your printer settings. There is a margin around the image known as the "unprintable" area. Your printer is set to place this margin around the image and will not print the image at 100%. To change that setting, you will have to contact the printer manufacturer.

Thanks, Greg Technical Support

So I contacted HP "DeskJet 840 Support" ANSWER:

From: "DeskJet 840 Support" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 10:15 PM > Subject: Re: HP DeskJet 840C Printer e-mail support > > > Hi Randy, > > Thanks for your e-mail. You have two questions that I will try to > answer. One deals with scanner issues and the second is an issue with > startup. > There will be an area that is unprintable simply because the printer has > to have a slight border. For instance, the printer feed wheels must be > able to hold the paper when printing. > The second issue sounds like a software issue...>

MY REPLY: > Thanks for the answer > may be yuo are right, but nearly 2 centimeters all around the printed area, > sound to me a little bit excessive as ""non printable area", moreover this > happens only when sending a document from the scanner to the printer: > something is wrong between them and the result is that I have an inefficient > system to do what I very often need at home: a copier. > Waiting for a possible solution at the problem (apart from throw away > printer and scanner), a send you the e-mail received by Agfa on the subject. > Finally, untill one month ago I had a wonderful scanner HP 5p that have made > an excellent work (with no fuss about non printable area) with a Canon BJ200 > and in my clinic a similar 5P is still working with a Laserjet 4P and a > Epson 870: it is a lucky circumstance or is due to your splendid utility to > make copies?? (can I use it with the agfa?) > Thanks again > Antonio > Troubleshooting > FINALLY ITALIAN AGFA RAPPRESENTATIVE suggest me to wait because, perhaps, in future my issue will be solved by new releases of the scanner software but, it will be doubtfull to guess if it will function on MY scanner. Sorry for this disclaim, but I think it will help people to avoid mistakes. > Antonio Fresini MD Naples, Italy>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I got this Snapscan e40 scanner at a very low price (110$CAD) because Agfa has release a newer version of this scanner (e42) and it was the last one available on stock. After a very bad experience with HP ScanJet 4200c, paied around 300$CAD (only 90 days warranty!?) and not getting any response from it most of the time. I sent it to HP for repair lately. They evaluated cost 400$CAD to fix it! Crazy ! Better change it... for another brand : Agfa Snapscan.

Snapscan is so easy to set and use compared to HP. I got a 1-year warranty, and a better speed, resolution and color-depth quality. Software bundled with Agfa scanner is also a lot better. What a deal! I'm enthousiastic about this product. Agfa support and web site is even better than HP's. I would recommand any Agfa scanner over HP's, anytime. I'm just starting using my Snapscan e40 but it runs very smoothly, no problem at all so far.

I was fooled by the multi-functionality of the product, learning only the hard way that the head only has three months warranty. To replace it will cost $250+, now I have (an expensive) boat anchor!!

I bought this when I started working remotely and it has been great. The laser printer is high quality, and although it takes a bit of start-up time to print one page (as most laser printers do), I am able to print hundreds of page without any problems.

I use the fax regularly, to send and receive, and have never had a problem with a mis-fax or missing an incoming fax.

I have not used the copier much since you have to feed in the pages, but whenever I have used it I have been happy with the results.

Overall, if you need a multifunction I highly recommend this one.

I bought this cartridge for two reasons: it's convienence and because it is a sheet-fed scanner. The printer/scanner combonation saves a lot of space on your desk. Switching the ink cartridge with the IS-22 cartridge is very simple & easy. However, I had trouble installing the software driver and then got a error telling me that this driver didn't support the hardware! All this was easily fixed by downloading the newest driver from Canon's website. I have not had any problems since installing the updated driver.

I also wanted a sheet-fed scanner so that I could image a multi-page document easily. That is, I wanted to be able to put in, say, a 15 page document, hit scan, and have all 15 pages scanned automatically (as opposed to having to scan each page individually, as with all flatbed scanners). Alas, this will allow you to scan and save only one page at a time. This is a pity since this is the strength that sheet-fed scanners have over flatbeds. So, if you do not have much space on your desk and you need a scan just an occasional few pages, this will be a great option for you! A flatbed will generally give you better quality images, but takes up lots of space. If you're doing lots of pages at once, then seek out another scanner.

The ability to use an optional scanner cartridge with you printer is a wonderful idea. Number one, it saves a lot of deskspace. Second, it is cheaper than most flat bed scanners. And you get technical support from the same company, if needed.

You won't get high quality scans with this product though. There are noticeable vertical or horizontal lines that show up in the scanned image (depending whether you were scanning portrait or landscape) even when scanned in the highest possible resolution. Most of the lines can be retouched with good photo editing software like Photoshop 4.0 or above, but are still noticeable after printing.

In conclusion; buy this for the convenience and space saving benefits. If you are planning on getting proffesional results, use a flatbed scanner. If you're just scanning snapshots to send via email to relatives and friends, than this is probably the most economical choice for you.

This product is available at many other locations for $99. That is the price for a new scanner, not refurished. See other sites.

I bought mine 3 weeks ago, and am very happy! Don't know where the reviewer below shopped, but I price-checked all over. This scanner is cheaper here than anywhere else online -- check for yourself, and search for "4300Cse".

I saved money because it's "refurbished". I was a little skeptical, but gave it a try. Glad I did! ...This looks brand-new, I can't tell the difference. Works just fine. Bottom-line, saved me bucks.

I would recommend this scanner to home-users. I'm happy.

HP's patch for WinXP killed the USB interface and HP was not willing to fix the root problem. Have seen many people reporting the same problem on HP's user forum. At least 20 complaints have been filed with the Better Business Bureau but HP seem to ignore most of them.

I've used this scanner on both '98 and ME. It works great. I never had any problems with it. It scans nice, and it has a preview before the actual scan to allow one to make specific choices for that particular scan.

We bought a Scanjet 8290 with auto document feeder last week because we need a fast scanner to digitize thousands of documents. It seems like none of the really fast scanners work with Macs, only Windows. HP, on the other hand, promised scans "up to 25 pages per minute."

Well, we couldn't get it to scan more than 4 pages per minute using our 1 GHz iMac (768 MB RAM). After a couple of days of trying to get it to work, we finally called HP's tech support (their website is so bad it's unbelievable). We were told that the 25 pages per minute rate is for a really souped up Windows machine (2 GHz, loads of RAM, etc). As far as their engineers are concerned, they can't scan more than 4 pages per minute on OS X either (on a machine similar to ours).

It boils down to software, and the tech guy said there are no plans to write better software for OS X to fix this discrepancy in performance. I think it's false advertising and a total lack of regard for their customers. Besides, if I'll have to end up using a Windows machine, I would have gone with a different scanner (the Fujitsu ones get good reviews). The only reason I bought HP is because of the OS X compatibility and the purported high scan throughput.

For now, I suggest you don't buy an 8290 if you're looking at their promised scan rates and especially if you're on a Mac platform. Their software stinks, and you'll only get 4 pages per minute (if you save all your files into Acrobat; as JPGs, you get 2 pages per minute). I'm back in the market for another scanner, although I'm resigned to the fact that I might have to use a PC to get what I want. But there's no way I'm buying an HP ever again.

Don't believe HP's claim that the 8290 is "network ready". I was disappointed to learn, after I purchased mine, that the scanner cannot be accessed over our network, because our operating system is not NT4. If you use Win98, Win2000, or WinXP, forget the network feature.
Other than that bit of false advertising, I have no complaints. The hardware and software work smoothly and efficiently, and the 25 pages per minute claim is achievable, but only when scanning to a file, which is the best procedure anyway.

Right off the bat on installation the driver is not signed off by microsoft, thay say continue anyway---I did even though I did this with a creative product and it screwed up my computer had to do a complete format and recovery, they care not about the hrs, hrs, and hrs of your time to fix there garbage products. Back to the scanner, noticed a smell after install, it was coming from the scanner, took it for a new item being used for first time. On a test scan the scan was ok and quality so so but I could tweek it out if I had a chance. After a few scans the scanner would only scan 1/2 of the item. (Travel only 1/2 way down the glass).. The smell was the stick on tape they use to hold the glass up to the unit. the glass was coming loose and falling down, the light would hit the glass about 1/2 way through the scan and get stuck then return. I can fix things, and I probably could of got some good two sided tape and replace the factory tape, ya, would of worked but to think that they would use tape to hold the glass up, with no other back-up is a real joke. Shame on you Microtek and thank god for these user reviews. And don't forget about that not signed off driver that comes with the soft ware. Do your self a favor and check out that canon scanner with 64 reviews (Good one's) Cost's $10 more.

The main thing I wanted to do with this scanner was to scan and then email my pictures to friends and family. This scanner is USB and under $... many stores!!! It's quiet and the picture quality is great for it. I have no complaints yet on it, works like a charm. Setup instructions and software were included so with most any USB you just plug and play!

This is a poorly made scanner. It produces poor images, the software is very cumbersome, it is extremely slow, and worst of all is that it does not work half the time. Actually mine is going back to Polaroid tommorrow because the unit keeps trying to spit out the slide tray.

Don't waste your money.

Unlike others here, I have generally had a good experience with my Sprintscan 4000. I bought my first one in 1999 when they first appeared on the market ... It was the first 4000 ppi slide/film scanner available and I upgraded from a 2700 ppi Nikon Coolscan. (I also have Sprintscan's half brother - a Microtek Artixscan 4000f - mechanically identical but different case & software).

The original PolaColor Insight software was buggy, but later versions improved. The current version (v. 5.5.1) and firmware upgrade (free downloads) work fine. The scan resolution and sharpness are quite good - I've made prints up to 16x24 that look fantastic. If you plan to spend $800 or more then buy a Nikon or Minolta with Digital Ice, but if you can pick up a Sprintscan 4000 for $300 and can live without the "Ice" then go for it! Forget the Silverfast - it's not that great. The Microtex scanner works well too but the software is not as good as Polaroid's and they are not cross-compatible. Look into Vuescan (Hamrick.com)- It'll drive both scanners and produces better scans from negatives than either native software.

I bought this about 2 years ago for quite a princely sum and have had a pretty good time using it. The resolution is satisfactory, but the main problems are:

- very grainy image at the pixel level; adjacent pixels are often jarringly different from each other in color; averaging them over an area produces the correct result, but with loss of detail(especially with people's eyes). Since I like to make large size poster prints, this is a problem for me. Shouldn't affect anyone working with 11" x 17" or less.

- Software that removes blemishes from the image softens it too much. I've just given up on this "feature" and instead use the Photoshop rubberstamp tool to get rid of blemishes and scratches in the negative.