How good are the new low cost scanners?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PSiegmann
  • Start date Start date
P

PSiegmann

I have an Umax Astra 2400 (from 1999). It works fairly nice, but it's
SCSI, and SCSI is on the way out (at least on home PC's). In fact, I am
using it with the SCSI card that came with the scanner itself, and the
driver situation for that thing is not the best. It works with XP, but,
how will it work with Vista? Or with Linux? Or with the Version that
comes after Vista?

In short: I am thinking about buying a new USB-Scanner OR buying a
brand SCSI adapter (adaptec) just for the scanner.

I don't scan that often, so I don't need a high end device. But I don't
want a worse scanner either. How do the new cheap scanners, like the
canon lide, ScanJet 3800 etc. (or even a printer-scanner combination,
like PIXMA MP500, OfficeJet 5615 etc.) compare to an older, but good
device like the Umax Astra 2400? (which was much more costly).

Should I stick with it, or get a newer thing?
 
In message said:
I have an Umax Astra 2400 (from 1999). It works fairly nice, but it's
SCSI, and SCSI is on the way out (at least on home PC's). In fact, I am
using it with the SCSI card that came with the scanner itself, and the
driver situation for that thing is not the best. It works with XP, but,
how will it work with Vista? Or with Linux? Or with the Version that
comes after Vista?

In short: I am thinking about buying a new USB-Scanner OR buying a
brand SCSI adapter (adaptec) just for the scanner.

I don't scan that often, so I don't need a high end device. But I don't
want a worse scanner either. How do the new cheap scanners, like the
canon lide, ScanJet 3800 etc. (or even a printer-scanner combination,
like PIXMA MP500, OfficeJet 5615 etc.) compare to an older, but good
device like the Umax Astra 2400? (which was much more costly).

Should I stick with it, or get a newer thing?
Click to expand...

I'd say get a new USB scanner. The performance of scanners has rocketed
over the years, and the cost has dropped.

The Epson Perfection 3490 Photo is the current A-list choice at PC Pro
magazine - you can read their review of it. Current price is about £60.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/80002/epson-perfection-3490-photo.html

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/labs/131/scanners/products.html

You can also find a number of scanner reviews from Computer Shopper at
the PC Pro web site.
 
I have an Umax Astra 2400 (from 1999). It works fairly nice, but it's
SCSI, and SCSI is on the way out (at least on home PC's). In fact, I am
using it with the SCSI card that came with the scanner itself, and the
driver situation for that thing is not the best. It works with XP, but,
how will it work with Vista? Or with Linux? Or with the Version that
comes after Vista?

In short: I am thinking about buying a new USB-Scanner OR buying a
brand SCSI adapter (adaptec) just for the scanner.

I don't scan that often, so I don't need a high end device. But I don't
want a worse scanner either. How do the new cheap scanners, like the
canon lide, ScanJet 3800 etc. (or even a printer-scanner combination,
like PIXMA MP500, OfficeJet 5615 etc.) compare to an older, but good
device like the Umax Astra 2400? (which was much more costly).

Should I stick with it, or get a newer thing?
Click to expand...

I just got rid of my Umax 2200 scsi/usb since it was scsi & its usb was
ver 1.1. Bought the Canon 8400f & it is very fast in scanning; had to
blink twice & do a couple of more color photo scans to check; quality
of scans were also better.

Drivers & software are available with the scanner but linux would be
a problem: recognized but "model not supported" as per suse 10.1; I do
need to check a couple of other models to see if it will work.

The canon 4200f would be better than the lide, I believe; or you can
get the epson 3490 at about the same price range $99. If you are
running the "latest" ver of your distr linux, check to see what scanners
or multi-function thingy is "supported".

The usb 2.0 hi-speed connection is very nice & one doesn't have to preload
the scanner on bootup but just turn whatever to "on" whenever needed &
leave it off the rest of the time.
 
Back
Top