Отзывы о Сканер Canon CanoScan LiDE 300
1154 отзывов пользователей o Canon CanoScan LiDE 300
Пользовались
Canon CanoScan LiDE 300?
Поделитесь своим опытом и помогите другим сделать правильный выбор
Капеллан-6IMRF
13.06.2005
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
I use the scanner to make E-copies of research litterature directly in Adobe Acrobat. Since the scanner fits nicely into my laptop bag and requires no separate power supply other than the USB cable, I have have no problems aquiring resources for research. I too had some minor problems with the twain driver, the solution was to install all of the software allowing the Canon twain to interface with the Adobe programs.An excellent buy and an awesome portability solution for students in the library.
ОмниКод-9NQUZ
25.08.2003
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I purchased this scanner for the purpose of scanning old B&W negatives (film size A116), color 35mm slides, and large format (Hasselblad) color negatives and slides...in addition to B&W and color photo scans and the occasional text scan.I found the directions well written and the scanner and software easy to install on my computer. The test scan I took came out as beautiful as the original. Then, I randomly selected one of the B&W negatives for scanning...the picture that looked back at me took my breath away!!! It was taken 70+ years ago (and has been crammed into a metal matchbox for about the same number of years), and it was absolutely stunning...yes, this scanner was everything I had hoped it would be.Then, I attempted to save this scan...and the problems began. It seemed that both of the softwares included were not happy with my computer set-up. I settled on using Photoshop Elements 2.0, because I was more familiar with it. I would load the software, do a preview (which brought up a large thumbnail), then do a final scan. After the final scan, I received an error message that said it could not perform that function. I then performed the scan a second time, and everthing was fine. I could then save the picture. However, if I tried to scan a second negative, the software locked up, forcing me to go into Task Manager applications and end the task. I discovered that if I closed Photoshop Elements after each saved scan, then restarted it, things worked okay. For me, this was NOT acceptable! My plan was to contact Canon tech support the following week...Since this was a Friday, I decided I should take a second look at Canon's system requirements for the 9900F, since this had all of the earmarks of a memory (RAM) issue. I was running a Windows XP Pro (upgraded from Windows 98Me), a 1.4GHZ processor, 256MB of RAM...the minimum that Canon recommended for Windows XP (w/USB 2.0) is 566 MHz and 128 MB RAM! Hmmmmm... I figured that boosting the RAM would help, but the cost of the type of RAM I had was kind of high, so my son talked me into upgrading the entire system (new 2.4 GHz processor, new motherboard, and 1024 MB of RAM, and a fresh install of Windows XP). Well, now it works PERFECTLY...no problems.I had heard prior to purchase there were software issues with the Canon 9900F, but I have been very happy with other Canon products I own, so I went for it! Maybe I was in need of an upgrade anyway...HOWEVER, I do believe that Canon's system requirements were way off with regard to the RAM required to use the scanner and effectively operate the software. I might have knocked half a star off for this, but I don't believe these shortcomings should reflect poorly on what is otherwise an OUTSTANDING scanner.
Туманник-7EEPO
06.10.2003
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I purchased this scanner specifically for the task of digitizing a box of old, disintergrating/fading old family photos, almost all being Black&White. I tried a few photos at a local copy place, but the $18 per hour (plus $10 CD burning fee) quickly convinced me that I could purchase a scanner for a lot less than what it would cost to scan the photos on an hourly fee basis.With a few dozen exceptions, this scanner was able to satisfactorily scan my old photos. Even though this scanner has a number of limitations, I gave the scanner the top rating because it did perform as described/intended and is a good value for the dollar. I would buy this unit again. The ease of hardware and software installation was a pleasant surprise, and are easy to use. Even the included OCR software suprised me with the quality and accuracy of the resulting Word or PDF documents; it even could, with a little tweaking, scan and convert tabular information. (This is an added, unexpected benefit, as I have a 200+ page document, mostly tables, that I have always intended to convert to PDF format but postponed the task due to the emense retyping involved.)I have always disliked the "Stars" and "Best Buy" rating systems as I have been 'bitten' several times when I bought some highly rated products. No product is perfect; all have things that it can do well, and some things it can't do well (or at all). If you are unfortunate enough to buy a top rated product that can't do the one thing that you need it to do, top rated or not, you have wasted your money. [It is interesting to note that many 'impartial reviews' tend to rave about a product's good points and 'gloss over' deficiencies.]So, you should be aware of what this scanner could NOT do for me:.It does not scan transparencies (I had one 4 X 6).It has a VERY limited depth of focus: things not in intimate contact with the scan plate WILL be out of focus (a dozen or so photos mounted on stiff, warped backings could not be satisfactorily scanned, even with a phone book on the scanner cover).The scan plate is recessed making scans of oversized items impossible: the item is not in contact with the glass and thus out of focus (I had a couple of oversized photos and a few 8 X 10 photos permanently mounted on an oversized backing/frame that could not be scanned satisfactorily)Also, the unit is a bit 'flimsy' (dropped my mechanical pencil on the cover and it left a 'door dingy') and the cover not heavy enough to flatten the folds even in standard paper to maintain full scan plate contact without assistance (phonebook).
Пульсар-2KTRJ
02.06.2005
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I mostly use this for scanning documents and its definitely fantastic for that application. Very fast, reliable, and compact. I can get a good quality grayscale scan in less than 10 seconds. The fact that its powered off the USB port is extremely convenient (ended up returning a scanner and replacing it with this because of this feature). I'd highly recommend this.Cannot comment on photo scanning as I haven't done this yet (use a digital camera anyway).
Сатурниан-0GQFX
17.02.2005
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I own several Canon's flat bed scanners for many years and are happy with Canon's products.First, Canon's scanners are designed as compact, portable, easy to install and use.Second, Canon's scanners are designed with USB powered, that means low power consumption, and most important there is no additional power adaptor required!Third, Low operating noise. LiDE 35 has lower noise than the LiDE 20/30.We use scanner for documentation very often (use B&W mode and 300/400 dpi). Here are some testing results for CanoScan LiDE 35 (mechanical comparison only):1. B&W scan, 300 dpi: 10 second scan, 10 second return (LiDE 20: 20 second scan, 15 second return)2. B&W scan, 400 dpi: 20 second scan, 10 second return (LiDE 20: 40 second scan, 15 second return).Therefore LiDE 35 save about 40% scan time compared with LiDE 20.
Аргонавт-1LGLN
04.02.2005
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
This is not as fast as other scanners I have used, but overall it is easy to use. The scanning process is slow, but this is maybe only an issue if you need to scan several documents as quickly as possible. Otherwise the scanning speed isn't a hinderance to any casual user.The included software is powerful (includes Optical Character Recognition software so you can scan printed documents and convert them to a text file). Buttons on the scanner allow for easy access to commonly used functions, such as emailing photos, storing images to a file, or editing photos in your favorite image editing program.The power over USB is also nice for people with fully occupied power strips. There's only one cord to fuss with.Additionally, the thin profile of this scanner makes it easy to store on a shelf when it's not in use.
Сатурниан-7PHWR
12.03.2003
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
Not happy with the drivers for this scanner. I bought this scanner in March 2003, and the CD-ROM that came with it included non-current drivers that were not Windows XP certified. The manual told me to install these uncertified drivers over the strongly-worded warning from the operating system not to do so. Within minutes of installing the drivers on my new (<1 month old) computer, the operating system experienced three crashes. I removed the drivers, downloaded the new but still uncertified version of the drivers from Canon's website, installed the new version, and used Norton Utilities to repair the damage from the first installation. Even after all this, the drivers are still flaky. From time to time the driver will return a general error saying that it could not communicate with the scanner. To correct this, I have to unplug the scanner and plug it back in (because there is no on/off or reset switch).When this problem is not manifesting itself, scanning pictures/prints works fine. Good color and brightness accuracy. The multiple-image scan feature, which allows you to place several pictures on the bed at once and scan them all simultaneously into separate files, is very useful. Scan times for prints is very fast: about 15 seconds total for three prints laid out on the bed. My only wish is that the scan driver should automatically cure mildly skewed pictures because it is extremely hard to place multiple photos on the bed with zero degree accuracy. Unfortunately, it doesn't do this.Scanning photographic negatives is totally different. Scan time is extremely long: about 10 minutes per three negatives at 600 dpi resolution. Also, the software is very unpredictable as to how it determines where one negative ends and the other begins. Often enough to be annoying, the scanner incorrectly sizes the negatives, requiring extensive manual intervention to override it. I have sometimes been forced to do a lot of manual jiggering with the negatives, including using opaque masks over some negatives to make it easier for the software to "automatically" detect where they begin and end. This feature is so twitchy that I sometimes just press the "preview" button twice and get differently-sized images.Image quality of scanned negatives is variable: sometimes it is very good indeed. Other times it tends to produce an overexposed image with colors bled out, requiring more manual intervention. Scans from negatives also tend to emphasize problems with the source material that may not have been obvious in the prints made from the same negatives. E.g., In pictures with a fairly flat-field of color in the background (such as lots of sky/water), there is a noticeable tunnel-vision effect which appears to have been caused by the point and shoot 35mm camera which took the photos. This was barely noticeable in the professionally-made prints, but quite apparent in the scan, requiring still more manual intervention to correct.In short, this scanner certainly does a lot of things, some of them very well. But it nowhere near as stable in operation as I would have expected, and it is by no means fast or reliable enough to easily use it for anything like a large volume of slides or negatives.
Лунатик-7QTSS
21.02.2004
4/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
I first pick this scanner because it was nice and compact looking, with an eye catching silver slim design. It had USB 2 and good resolution, but like most scanners doesn't have too many other features. It ran fine on my PIV XP laptop with 512mb, the driver and software install perfectly on the first try. People, who say they have software issues, should reformat their machine, because there are some software or memory conflicts from human error. Usually people install thing and erase system files improperly or accidentally.Performances:Scanning images on this machine is fast and the scans look great. Its actual scanning perform is a lot better then the machine that replaced it. The HP 6110 all-in-one scanned a lot slower and produced very grainy images. Canon's scans were much smoother quality.Bad bulb that went lights out:I like everything in this little scanner, but Canon cut corner on two major issues. The first, which was the reason I had to return it, is: there is no ON/OFF switch. The scanner power up through the USB cable when the computer turns on. Sometime I leave my laptop on for whole day, which also leaves the scanner on for a whole day: this is how I figured the light bulb died within the first month. At first, I unplugged the USB cable, but over time you forget or get careless. Maybe there is a setting to control this, but it was too late. Canon cut corner on the ON/OFF switch simply to save money. The other smaller problem, but annoying feature is the driver software doesn't let you customize scanning sizes. After using a HP for years, I would like to pick my own scan size, sometime like 72dpi or 350dpi. Canon preset dpi in increment of 100s is annoying.The return to the storeGood thing the bulb died on the 28th day so I got to return and exchange for a more feature HP 6110, but with lesser performance rating. I stayed away from Canon's cool but cheaply constructed design, until the overly impressive Canon's I960 photo printer changed my mind.
ОмниКод-2STMH
01.04.2005
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
I recently purchased this item with a rebate offer so I got a great price on it. As far as the quality, I would say it is pretty average but great for the price paid. I am able to use it and scan at upto 1200 dpi(dots per inch) resolution as it says. My computer doesn't freeze up or anything. Those of you using Photoshop, it works great with Photoshop no problems. I was able to use the "Import" function from Adobe Photoshop file menu with out any problems. May be the other reveiwer just didn't have much luck with it. I am satisfied and would recommend this scanner for regular scans.
Лунатик-8FKYZ
14.03.2004
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I bought this unit to scan old b/w negatives & pictures. I had to increase my RAM from 128M to 512M and upgrade my USB to 2.0. Once I did that, things worked better. However, I still couldn't save a bmp file directly without it crashing. After speaking with Canon tech support--which was far more helpful on the scanner side of the house than their copier side--I found that the ArcSoft software had some issues. I began to use the included Adobe Photoshop Elements program exclusively and, what a difference! The truly extraordinary ability of this program to take a faded, discolored photo and, via auto color correction, restore it to vibrant, rich colors is astonishing! Even b/w pictures can be easily enhanced with the auto contrast feature. Have been able to scan old box camera negatives (120, 620, 116 & 616 formats) using the carrier, to my great delight. One caveat, the large format carrier for negatives is not as robust as the 35mm negative carrier. My normal scans of positives is at 400 or 800 dpi. It's impressive that a photo the size of a quarter can be effectively enlarged with great integrity. I have pulled out subtle details in photos that had escaped my notice even with the aid of a conventional magnifying glass. If you scan your photos at a minimum of 400 dpi you'll be amazed at how much they can be enlarged with little to no visible pixelation. I haven't tried batch scanning. None of my local retailers carried this unit. As one explained to me, the general buying public tends to go for the cheapest, low resolution scanners. Am so glad I went for this more powerful, utilitarian unit. Its versatility to work with negatives from 35mm to large format 4x5, as well as 35mm slides, and photos or documents makes it a great choice. The Canon program Scangear is easy to use and even a novice can quickly master it in short order.
Эксопилот-7QDBJ
21.06.2005
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Great value for your money. I have never had a problem loading it on my computer or getting it to work properly. Easy to install.Update:I have a new scanner at work and I miss this one so much. It was so much easier to use....no problems with it.
Квантум-2ACJR
21.06.2005
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I installed the software and plugged in the scanner and away I went. No problems on XP. Great convneient scanner at a great price. Awesome quality and good color. A little slow so don't buy it if you have a ton of stuff to scan...
Аргонавт-0EHDS
16.04.2004
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
Well after accidently dropping and smashing my previous Canoscan 1240U which I was completely happy with, EXCEPT for the speed. Superb image quality, but painfully slow, I looked at the canon site to checkout the new range.I considered 3 canoscans, the Lide20/30 and 50.I selected the 50 primarily because it was USB2 and more than twice the speed ofmy old scanner (the 1240U's are renovned for slow scans).Unfortunately this scanner just doesnt live up to any of the hype or my expectations. I did expect the image quality to be as good as the lide 20 or 30.The images as other people have also said are grainy and drilling down on a 600 or 1200dpi scan easily shows this. I am very dissapointed with the image quality.The dust button must be enabled otherwise dust imperfections are shocking.The speed is certainly faster especially on preview. But on some scans depending on what you are scanning at etc its not alot faster than my old scanner. I get thefeeling that this scanner is geared around the 300dpi, as some scans other than300dpi eg: 150 take an unexplainable long time.The updates of the scan software are nice, but not alot better in my view.I did end up having to uninstall all of my older Canoscan software to be surethat there wasnt some wierd software issue causing the poor quality.If I had to choose again, I think i would again suffer the slow speed of the Lide 30 (updated 1240U) and choose it even the lide 20 is better quality than the 50.Having said all this even though the scanner is usb2 capable i have it plugged into a usb1 only port, but this shouldnt make any difference.
ИнфраГость-5OPBV
01.03.2005
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
After getting burned on the worst scanner ever, the HP 3970- I should have looked at the negative reviews on that before I purchased it (I've now resold it on Ebay at a $20 loss), I bought this Great, Wonderful, Scanner based on reviews I had read online.This is truly a marvel, software downloads fast and easy and it scans really well (I use "magazine color" for the best picture quality on the scanner). I totally recommend this to anyone as it produces quality scans, is fast & is easy to use.
Кронос-7TNIG
06.03.2004
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
I purchased the CanoScan Lide 30 scanner from Amazon about six months ago so I have enough usage history to have an opinion and I find it to be an adequate scanner for the price. The features I like best are the USB connectivity and the size. The USB cable also powers the scanner and reduces clutter by not having a separate 12volt transformer. The scanner is quite thin (a little more an inch) and compact and can be easily carried in a briefbag for those, as myself, that require portability. I have never used the small stand that allows the scanner to be positioned sideways. The optical resolution of 1200 dpi is generally adequate for me and I would guess would be the same for the average consumer user.The color rendition is passable. The scanner speed is slow but I knew that when I purchased the unit. The most objectionable feature I have found is the scanner produces longitudinal alternating streaks of light and dark that are visible when a photo is zoomed to close range that gives an appearance that could be compared to corduroy fabric. Prior to using the CanoScan Lide 30, I used a HP v40xi, 4 in 1, printer, scanner, copier and fax and the streaks are not seen in these photos. I believe the streaks are probably caused by the LED light source and the LED technology is what allows the scanner to be so diminutive.Since buying the scanner, I have become active in the restoration of old photographs with PhotoShop 7.0 and at times I wish for a higher end scanner and will probably buy another scanner down the road. Even if I owned a second, higher end scanner, I could still find times that I would use the CanoScan Lide 30 for it size and portability and I rate it as a good value for the price.
Сириус-8MTNY
07.11.2003
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Last year, after extensive research, I purchased an Epson Perfection 2400 (Photo scanner) for my brother and was dead set on buying one for myself. At that time, there was no other scanner that had its quality and features at a bargain price. Well, I finally decided to buy a scanner and surprise, surprise...it's the Canon FIDE 30.Here's four reasons why:Quality of scan: I think the quality of scan should always be the primary factor in evaluating a scanner. This scanner produces scans equal to those of first-rate "professional" grade scanners like the Minolta Powerlook III (which I have at work). The scanner goes up to 1200 X 2400 dpi resolution and the results are stunning. Price: $70 (about $120 less than the Epson Perfection)Design: The small form-factor metallic body casing is durable and eye-catching. The small footprint is ideal for notebook users who like portability. Power is supplied through the USB connection so you have one less cord to worry about. The three buttons on the scanner for scan, copy, and email functions are a nice bonus (but not really needed).Software: The Canon scan control software is simple and intuitive. The OCR text recognition is excellent.Now for a scanner at this price, I shouldn't be nit-picking but I will anyways for those who need to find faults in a product:1. The scan speed as other reviewers mentioned is relatively slow. So if you plan on scanning a large number of photos or documents in one sitting, it could get a little frustrating. But if you want quality WITH speed you really should be looking to a "professional" grade scanner (and get ready to spend some bucks). Even then, the speed difference would be seconds and not minutes. 2. The small footprint is great for portibility but for some people it may make the scanner seem flimsy because it is so thin and light.3. XP users: DO NOT install the software on the cd that comes with the scanner. Go to the website and download the updated versions.Well that about sums it up. To get a scanner like this for $70 is an outright steal.
Сириус-4IHVU
02.10.2003
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
Executive summary: the scanner has good and bad points.The immediate problem is that the drivers available as of 9/2003 do not support Apple's new USB2.0-based Macs (G5, new iMac). Canon acknowledges the problem and says they're working on new drivers, but no promise on when they'll be delivered. Another, less obvious downside is that the current generation driver leaves a background process running whether or not the scanner is plugged in, which process prevents the computer from going into "sleep mode" on its own (OSX 10.2). Also, I noticed that when I linked the scan button to PS Elements, it started Elements in classic mode (solution: link to files Preview, or scan from within Elements). Again, as others have noticed, it can be slow and noisy. I do believe that when it works with USB2.0 Macs, it will be faster; currently, some scans finish (in the scanner) while data remains to be transferred to the host. Lastly, the OCR software still runs only in classic mode.So, what are the good points? For one, price. For another, its form factor, including the fact that it's USB-bus powered (even with a PowerBook) -- no wall wart or line lump required. With the driver installed, you don't have to start the "Canon toolbox" program to use the keys on the front of the scanner, and once you've configured the software, there's no delay to click buttons on-screen to make the scanner scan (for example, to copy). Four buttons are nice, too. Less obviously, its origin for scanning is at the front left of the scanner, rather than the back; if you need to scan a bunch of cards or 4x6 photos, it's more ergonomic. I haven't tried the "Z-fold" lid trick yet with books. I haven't used it enough to judge its quality with color photos, but scanning index cards in black&white or grayscale, or using it as a black&white copier, it seems fine.I think the scanner is a keeper, but then, my requirements are for a simple flat-bed scanner, and not for a graphics powerhouse model. If it were working with my USB2.0 iMac today, I'd rate it a star higher.
ХроноГость-2KFUT
10.12.2004
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
You just have to know what you're doing :-) I just got this scanner secondhand, and I have XP.Canon Australia support pages contain information on updating ASPI for Windows XP. http://www.canon.com.au/support/customer/default.asp?DXI=KnowledgeBase/Customer/KBArticleForm&File=KB00191Canon Europe has an updated CanoScan software download that apparently support XP. http://www.canon-europa.com/cgi-bin/CEDD/list-languages.cgi?catid=4&productid=142&systemid=47It's not that hard. I love it, and I've only had it for a week or so.
Дроид-9GTGS
02.09.2003
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
Picked up the Canon ScanoJet 5500F from a local store and started scanning medical school applications. I hoped to fill out these converted applications later using Microsoft Word. So this review is focused primarily on the OCR and text scanning capability of this scanner.Image Quality - 5/5 stars:The 5000F scans are very detailed and clear. If the document is to be a copy for archving in JPEG or BMP format, the scan quality is more than sufficient.Speed - 3/5 stars:Scanning a typical letter size document took about 90 seconds at 300 DPI. This is acceptable but not as fast as the comparably priced HP Scanjet 5400.Software 2/5 stars:The OCR wizard is overtly complex, with at least 6-10 menu steps to scan, recognize, translate, and save one page of document. While the scan took about 90 seconds, the whole process took approximately 5 minutes - the output result was not nearly as clean as an automatic graphic scan, then manual OCR conversion.OCR 1.5/5 stars:The bundled character recognition software Omnipage SE performs poorly on both text pages and forms. The software has a tendency to add non-existent punctuations, misform letters, and misalign paragraphs and texts. When scanning an inkjet document, the error grows exponentially since the characters lack the sharpness of laser prints; sample text printed using HP Photosmart 7350 lead to about 5% spelling/typo error. This makes editing Canon 5000F scanned documents a very tedious task; for comparison, the HP Scanjet 5400 & HP software completed the scans on the same documents with no errors.When working with forms, the OCR converted approximately 20% of the form accurately into Microsoft Word. Check boxes are often converted as big block letter "O", sometimes as a graphic, rarely as a check box. Overall very poor performance.Recommendation:If your scanner will primarily serve as a photo/graphic scanner, then this is a great value. If the document management feature in a scanner is important, I recommend looking into an HP scanner; there is a trade off - HP Scanners tend to trail Canon in graphic/film reproduction quality.
ХроноГость-7HTUB
14.09.2004
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Canon has some fantastic optics for photo scanning. So does Epson. I wanted to scan photos every now and then and maybe archive old photos, so great photo optics was important. Canon, known for great digital cameras, has the same quality in the scanners. Why this over the 3170? This is half the price, smaller (about 1/3 in height), and looks great. It fit about 4 4x6 photos on the scanner, use the multi-scan at 600 dpi and works fine. Sometimes though, I think the autocropping could be better. It took all of 5 minutes to set up and use. It does not need a separate power adapter as it uses the USB for power. Its quiet and fast.I have done over 600 scans so far. Works like a charm. Its so fast, I can scan about 75 to 100 pictures an hour!
Кронос-4CCSZ
02.08.2004
4/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
This scanner is sleek and does not need a lot of space, due to its design and the wonderful single USB cable connection. The scans are of good or very good quality (compared to HP).However the printer driver is unbelievable annoying. You have the option to use default scanning settings ( for b&w, greyscale, magazine, text) or to manually adjust the settings for each picture. The options are standard but the preview window is very small (too small). Thus you have to guess very often. But the worst feature of this driver is, that there is no way to save some of your own settings. You have to make the same adjustments all over again - for every single page of a document you are scanning ! (This affects every software you are using).This is unacceptable - on the other hand they deliver a well working OCR program with scanner (0mnipage). What are they thinking?
Пульсар-2BSPY
30.12.2004
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I am completely satisifed with the Canon scanner and love the trim design and LED indirect exposure technology.Excellent. Contrary to another reviewer's experience, I have had no problems running the scanner with XP.
Квантум-1VXQZ
30.08.2004
2/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
Nothing has worked right and I have given Canon ample time to correct the problem. Dirt and smudges under the glass, horrible twain driver (EPSON's much better), bad color mangement and no real support from Canon. I usually love my Canon products, but stay away (far away) from this one. I think I just got a bad unit, but also think that I am just goin' to be stuck with it forever.
Капеллан-3QKPT
12.12.2003
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Almost everytime that I buy something for my computer, I have to fight to get it to work. I'm a software Developer, so I know my way around computers pretty well. After struggling for 5 hours to get some new peripheral to work, I often wonder why non-geeks put up with it. HP used to be my default brand for everything, especially printers and scanners. I've had such bad luck the last few years with them, that I'm reluctant to purchase anything from them, except laser printers. So, even after reading all of the wonderful reviews about this Cannon scanner, I was still surprised that the installation went so well...put in the CD, click a few buttons, connect the scanner, begin scanning. I really like this little scanner...one cable, no power cord. It scans pretty fast and doesn't require warm up time. Cannon has showed me that it is possible to make quality computer add-ons at a low price. In addition, I also recommend buying this from amazon.com, instead of just reading the reviews and buying it from somewhere else. I could only find the LIDE 30 model in the stores I check, and the price was $30 over the price here, plus there isn't tax. I used the Supersaver for free shipping and it got here in 3-4 days. Impressive!
Показаны отзывы 985-1008 из 1154.
