CHEAPEST PRICE OF Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner
by Hendy Mahardhika on Dec.30, 2011, under CANON
Cheapest Price And Best Deal Of Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner
Great News For You That searching for a good And Cheap Product in Canon Scanner , if that true, i recommend you Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner. This product is the best Product in the similar product. Many people have buy Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner,and recommend it. If you have Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner you will Satisfy with this product.
- Fare Level 3 delivers automatic dust and scratch removal as well as fading, grain and backlight correction
- Zero warm-up time and lower power consumption with White LED
- “Auto Scan Mode” automatically adjusts settings by detecting what you are scanning
The Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner features Fare Level 3 delivers automatic dust and scratch removal as well as fading, grain and backlight correction, Zero warm-up time and lower power consumption with White LED, “Auto Scan Mode” automatically adjusts settings by detecting what you are scanning, Zero warm up time, Lower Power Consumption with White LED, 9600 dpi and 48-bit input/output.
CLICK HERE For More Info About Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner
Where To Buy Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner
You can Buy Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner from many big retailers offline or online like Amazon , Best Buy,Target,Walmart etc. But which one is the best? We have done work for you,we find the best deals to Buy Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner is at Amazon.com . This giant online retailer gives the best price.
Amazon.com is a reputable company that stands out in customer services. You will have a piece of mind because they will make sure you get this product on time.
Click Here To buy Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner From Amazon
:9000F, Canon, Canoscan, CHEAPEST, Color, Image, PRICE, Scanner
3 Comments for this entry
Leave a Reply
-
Hi! Welcome to Wordprints The Art Of Technology!
Thanks for Visiting My Blog Feel free reading post here and leaving comments, or You can subscribing to the RSS feed. See ya bro!
December 30th, 2011 on 7:52 pm
Fabulous performer in this price range!,
I sold my Epson V750-M Pro to get the CanoScan 9000F instead. I’ll divide my review into three categories: speed, quality, and user interface. ____ SPEED: I just couldn’t get around to scanning anything with the V750 because the wait with every scan is just agonizing. It sounds like it has to rev up its engine every time. On the other hand, The speed and agility of the 9000F are impressive. I place several pictures at a time on the glass to scan, and the software lets you independently select the settings for each picture, mixing resolutions and corrections. Then it goes and scans each one separately. And because the LED light requires no warm-up time, it works immediately you can just get so much done! I scanned over 150 pictures in the first few days of having this scanner — more than I did in the two years I had the Epson. However, do keep in mind that when scanning film and slides, scanning speed will be reduced drastically — that’s just the way it is, regardless of the scanner. _____ QUALITY: The V750 is a professional grade scanner (hence the almost $800 price tag) does a slightly better job with dust and scratch removal using Digital ICE. The 9000F uses FARE, which works well, but seems to not be quite as effective. Scans on the 9000F tend to be slightly more blue, but you can tweak that correction easily. ______ INTERFACE: The user interface is a bit clugey (is that how you spell it?), but it does everything it needs to, and while you’re scanning a large number of pics it stores them in its own catalog until you’re finished, then saves the files in one single sweep. The software seems to not retain some settings (I keep having to uncheck a box to create subfolders by scan date), but overall works very well. _____ CONCLUSION: If I had to choose on one hand between having the best scanner (V750) and never using it, and on the other hand having a great scanner (9000F) and using it like crazy, I would definitely take Option B. I highly recommend the 9000F for its beautiful design, easy setup, very good scanning quality, easy photo correction settings, ability to scan several pics at once, and impressive speed!
Was this review helpful to you?
|December 30th, 2011 on 8:04 pm
Probably the best overall “A4″ size flatbed scanner under $700,
I bought this scanner primarily to digitally archive my 35mm film and slide collection. The scanner I was using, a 9 year old Microtek 4900 flatbed, was barely up to the task, with a maximum optical resolution of 2400 dpi, and it had no built-in color correction to remove the orange mask from color negatives, let alone automated dust/scratch removal. And at 2400 dpi, it was far too slow, taking almost an hour to scan a 6-frame film strip. How does the Canon 9000F compare?
1. “Street price”, at Amazom.com, was $235 total, almost $500 less than the semi-pro Epson 700 flatbed film scanner. The 9000F can only scan 2 strips of 35mm film in one pass, whereas the Epson can scan 4. The 9000F can scan 4 mounted 35mm slides at a time, the Epson can scan 8. But for most amateur photographers, the $700 price tag of the Epson is pretty steep, and unless you have many thousands of slides or filmstrips to scan, the higher capacity of the Epson may not be worth the extra cost. The scanning rate of the 9000F is at least four times faster than my old Microtek at all resolutions between 300 & 2400 dpi. At higher resolutions, the 9000F slows down appreciably – a single 35mm film frame at 9600 dpi took about 20 minutes, with FARE enabled. During the scan, the drive motor in the 9000F is quite smooth, relatively quiet, and gives me the impression of pretty good quality. Other cheap scanners I have used sound like a concrete mixer.
2. Image quality. I have tried the 9000F on 35mm color negative film at 2400dpi, 3200dpi, and 9600dpi. The quality of the three scans are all excellent and appear to be about equal in consistency. I also tried scanning a regular 8×10 color photo enlargement at 600 dpi; the 9000F was very fast and the scan quality was incredible, resolving tiny details of the photo, plus dust specks and cat hairs that were invisible to the unaided eye. I have no reservations about the image quality of the 9000F, and can’t imagine any other scanner at this price point could better it. A word here about the maximum scan resolution of the 9000F and what it means in the “real world”. For reflective media like photo prints, the scanner can crank out 4800 dpi, and for transparencies (film or slides), 9600 dpi. But do you really need that much resolution? My one test frame of a 35mm color negative scanned at 9600 dpi had an interesting and unexpected result: The scanner’s resolution exceeds the film’s resolution by a substantial amount. Turns out that scanning that film strip at anything above about 3600 dpi did not yield any extra detail, just a huge increase in file size. It’s possible that the extremely fine grain size of Kodachrome 25 or Panatomic “X” film might allow the 9000F to pull out extra detail at 9600dpi, but none of my film or slides are extreme-fine grain types, so I can’t test that hypothesis myself. As for speed, scanning film at 9600dpi on the 9000F is very slow, about 20 minutes per frame with FARE enabled, so you probably won’t want to go above 3600 or 4800 unless you really need to. A 3200 dpi scan of the 35mm film frame took a bit less than five minutes with FARE enabled. This resolution produced the maximum detail from my film; a slightly smoother result than a 2400 dpi scan, but you have to look very close at 200% zoom in Photoshop to see the difference. With the 9000F set to 3200 dpi, a film scan results in a 14 megapixel RGB image, but don’t let this number mislead you into thinking that you can see tiny details out of 35 mm film scans. A typical digital SLR, with a 12~15 megapixel CMOS sensor (for example a Canon 50D), produces much sharper images than my film scans with the 9000F scanner, and that’s not even with a high-priced “L” series lens on the camera. I DON’T mean to imply in that last statement that the 9000F is a poor performer, just that you shouldn’t expect miracles out of scanning color negative film. I’d love to see how the 9000F performs scanning test charts shot on Panatomic “X” or Kodachrome 25. As for scanning color photo prints, you will probably not need to go above 600dpi most of the time. Although the 9000F is capable of scanning reflective media at 4800 DPI, most color photo print paper doesn’t have anywhere near this fine of a grain size. However, for forensic scanning of “real objects”, for example coins, flower petals, leaves, or documents, the 4800 dpi resolution could be useful, giving you the ability to see surface details that would be invisible other than under a microscope.
3. Speed of film scanning. The 9000F is way faster than my old Microtek, but probably not as fast as a $2500 Nikon film scanner. On the other hand, the 9000F can scan anything that will fit on the platen, at 1/10th the price of a dedicated film scanner. Loading of film and slides takes longer on a flatbed like this, and you can only scan 4 slides at a time, compared to unattended batch scanning of a hundred or more slides with some dedicated film scanners.
Following are my…
Read more
Was this review helpful to you?
|December 30th, 2011 on 8:33 pm
Great scanner…but,
PROS: This scanner is SUPER quick. I can scan four 35mm Slides at max resolution(4800 dpi), and it only takes 5 min. The driver software has a real nice set of options for pre-scanning. I Love the fact you can walk away from the scanner, and do something around the house while it scans…it will play a soundclip of your choice when it is finished, to alert you.
CONS: The USB cord is WAY too short. They need to package this with a longer chord. I would recommend a USB extender, or a longer chord if you plan on having this on the opposite side of your desk.
My OS is Windows XP. I have been having a LOT of problems with the Canon MP Navigator EX scanning software. Besides the good options. Its a resource hog. “Insufficient Memory” errors seem to be commonplace with the Canon MP Navigator EX software. Do your research before this purchase! Make SURE you have at least 4gb of memory.
WARNING: If you have 2gb or less of RAM, this software will not work correctly!
I have called Canon’s support center over 4 times, and am still having problems. The only way the software can work on my PC, is I have to start up my pc with bare bones drivers.
There is nothing on the web I have found to help…I had to resort to Canon’s support. They really need to revamp, and do something about this horrible horrible software that comes with it.
**side note(update): I updated my RAM to 4gb, and the software runs fine without a hitch. I cannot emphasize enough to you, to have enough RAM for the software.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
***IMPORTANT Update 10/13/2011: My old PC crashed, and now have a whole new rig. I am now running Windows 7 with 8gb of ram, and the insufficient memory error popped up again….well, to make a long story short, after agonizing about it for about a half-hour and doing research on the web, it seems like Canon finally wised up and updated their software. I now use the updated MP Navigator EX software(version 3.1.3.0), and its super fast!!
–>MAKE SURE YOU ARE USING THE MOST CURRENT SOFTWARE ON CANON’s WEBSITE BEFORE USING<–
Was this review helpful to you?
|