So I got the Canon 8800f scanner for Christmas. I wanted the Epson V700. But as my frugal husband proclaimed, "It's several hundred more!" I wanted the Epson since I have a ton of family slides plus all our "old" film photos/negatives that I want to convert to digital. And because I'm a "serious digital professional" rofl (see http://debbieschroeder.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/11/serious-digital.html) as Jeff likes to tease me, I want an excellent scanner. I need an excellent scanner for uploading at Crop Addict and for scanning documents for pdf and emails for my clients of Days Off Travel.
All in all I'm pretty frugal - I haven't bought any new clothes for about 2 - 3 years, don't wear makeup so don't have that expense and don't really buy much except for scrapbook stuff. I spend a lot of time researching something and deciding if the cost is worth it before I make a purchase so when I do spend, it's well thought out.
So, long story shorter. I wanted the Epson V700. But since I was given the Canon I thought I'd try it. It's does give a nicer scan than my previous scanner (an HP) but that one was an inexpensive scanner that I had bought maybe 5 or so years ago just to scan things before I was uploading my layouts and such so and before I realized I could scan film and negatives.
What's nice about the Canon 8800f is it's ability to scan and directly convert a document into a pdf file. With my old scanner I would have to scan the document, then open the photo and convert to a pdf. So the Canon will save me several minutes - figuring how often I have to convert a document into a pdf means it's well worth the time savings. I'm not sure if the Epson V700 does that - I need to actually go in and see one to see if they have the pdf button or whatnot. The Epson V500 does though.
However, the slide scan, that's another story. First I scanned a slight according to the quick start directions. This only gave me the option of scanning at 150 or 300 dpi. Not what I would call a quality scan - if you want print enlargements. But it at least does give the option to remove scratches and dust.
I then used the online manual and followed those directions - gives you several scanning dpi options up to 4800. But no removal or dush or scratches. Not good when you're scanning old slides that have been sitting around for years.
Finally I tried a combination of the two methods and switched the mode from simple to advanced. This allowed me to scan up to 9600 dpi and remove dust and scratches.
In terms of the quality. I was not impressed. The colors seemed a bit off but then my test scan was from 28 years ago and it was Jeff's slide not mine so I have not point of reference. I'll go back and include photos (using my laptop now so I don't have them on my harddrive.)
Additionally, the FARE (Canon's dust and scratch removal system as opposed to Epson's ICE), did a poor job. While it was able to remove the large particles, quite a few still remained. On the landscapes you can't see the scratches too much but when you look at the slide with people, you can see where FARE did not fare well.
(click on the photo for a larger image). This is the result of the scan following the directions in the online manual - which does not give you the option to use FARE and remove dust and scratches. As you can see there are a considerable amount of specks. And the green of the trees seem a bit off.
(click on image for larger view) Same photo but this time, scanning by a combination of the two methods and switching the mode from simple to advanced. Dust and scratches virtually gone with the exception of a few on the right top by the tree.
Now, here's the trick. Landscape scans are one thing, here's the photo with people.
(click on image for a larger view) Without using any editing software the image initially appears to be ok - free from scratches or dust. However, when you zoom in you see all the little specks and gunk.
(click on image for larger view). When you zoom in you can see all the specks all over both boys faces and bodies - not what you want in your photo. This is where I believe that FARE fails and ICE may be superior.
This is quite disappointing as I was just beginning to like the Canon 8800f. I'm going to try to go into one of the electronic stores and see if they have an Epson V700 on the floor and see if they'll let me attempt a scan so I can compare both machines. I know the 8800f can't really compare to the V700 so I'll look at the V500, since it's the same price class as the 8800f.
In terms of speed: the LED is definitely a plus as scanning was quick, even with multiple scans. It took slightly over 1 minute to scan 1 slide at 4800 dpi. The Canon 8800f, will only allow you to scan 4 slides at a time. For 4 slides at 4800 dpi it took about 7 minutes.
However, after you've scanned your 4 slides, the Canon 8800f will only allow you to save the first slide scanned. I attempted this twice and both times, the system defaulted to only saving the first slide. I'll have to play around with it and see if there's a way to tweak the system. Otherwise, there's no point in scanning 4 slides at a time if you can only save the first slide.
Scanning large objects: after receiving the Canon 8800f I went online to read other reviews. Some listed similar findings as I've discovered, ie. color quality not the same as with Epson scanners. One review mentioned that larger objects are unable to be scanned because the cover isn't able to close properly (the scanning buttons are on the lid). So I put a 500 page book on the scanner, opened to page 250, figured that was an easy 3 inches. Despite it's size it scanned, although a bit crooked but no problems in terms of the buttons not signaling or whatever.
I'm off to find an Epson V500 or V700 to test run and compare. Until then...