PC Review


Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread

Canon LiDE 25 & LiDE 70

 
 
Talal Itani
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      22nd Apr 2007

My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and I
found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77, Canon
LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since I have
a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document. These Canon
scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why are they so
inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.

Talal Itani


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Cari
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      22nd Apr 2007
Standalone scanners have come down in price because so many folks have
switched to All in One printers. Personally I prefer the standalones and
have had no problems with my LiDE80.
--
Cari (MS-MVP)
Windows Technologies - Printing & Imaging
http://www.coribright.com/windows

"Talal Itani" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:CKMWh.5823$Fs6.1211@trnddc03...
>
> My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and I
> found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77, Canon
> LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since I
> have a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document.
> These Canon scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why
> are they so inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.
>
> Talal Itani
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
mark.thomas.7@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      24th Apr 2007
On Apr 23, 3:15 am, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net> wrote:
> My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and I
> found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77, Canon
> LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since I have
> a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document. These Canon
> scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why are they so
> inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.
>
> Talal Itani


The only problem with LiDE's is that by nature they have very limited
depth of field, and are pretty much useless for scanning anything
other than flat paper. If you want to scan jewelry or other small 3d
objects, get another type of scanner.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Talal Itani
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      24th Apr 2007

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Apr 23, 3:15 am, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and I
>> found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77,
>> Canon
>> LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since I
>> have
>> a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document. These
>> Canon
>> scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why are they so
>> inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.
>>
>> Talal Itani

>
> The only problem with LiDE's is that by nature they have very limited
> depth of field, and are pretty much useless for scanning anything
> other than flat paper. If you want to scan jewelry or other small 3d
> objects, get another type of scanner.
>


I will only scan black and white text documents. Even with that I am
worried, $44.77 is an amazing price for a scanner. By the way, can jewelry
be scanned with a scanner?


 
Reply With Quote
 
CSM1
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      24th Apr 2007
"Talal Itani" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
newsDmXh.9830$no.4774@trnddc02...
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On Apr 23, 3:15 am, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and I
>>> found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77,
>>> Canon
>>> LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since I
>>> have
>>> a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document. These
>>> Canon
>>> scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why are they so
>>> inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.
>>>
>>> Talal Itani

>>
>> The only problem with LiDE's is that by nature they have very limited
>> depth of field, and are pretty much useless for scanning anything
>> other than flat paper. If you want to scan jewelry or other small 3d
>> objects, get another type of scanner.
>>

>
> I will only scan black and white text documents. Even with that I am
> worried, $44.77 is an amazing price for a scanner. By the way, can
> jewelry be scanned with a scanner?


Absolutely, if the scanner's sensor is a CCD type.
Just look at jewelry on Ebay.

A lot of the jewelry is from a scanner. Some are from a digital camera.

--
CSM1
http://www.carlmcmillan.com
--


 
Reply With Quote
 
Talal Itani
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      24th Apr 2007

"CSM1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:eqsXh.43$(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Talal Itani" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> newsDmXh.9830$no.4774@trnddc02...
>>
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> On Apr 23, 3:15 am, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and I
>>>> found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77,
>>>> Canon
>>>> LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since I
>>>> have
>>>> a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document. These
>>>> Canon
>>>> scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why are they
>>>> so
>>>> inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Talal Itani
>>>
>>> The only problem with LiDE's is that by nature they have very limited
>>> depth of field, and are pretty much useless for scanning anything
>>> other than flat paper. If you want to scan jewelry or other small 3d
>>> objects, get another type of scanner.
>>>

>>
>> I will only scan black and white text documents. Even with that I am
>> worried, $44.77 is an amazing price for a scanner. By the way, can
>> jewelry be scanned with a scanner?

>
> Absolutely, if the scanner's sensor is a CCD type.
> Just look at jewelry on Ebay.
>
> A lot of the jewelry is from a scanner. Some are from a digital camera.
>


This is very interesting. If the jewelry is flat, like a coin, I can see
how it can be scanned. But, what about rings, bracelets, can they also be
scanned with a flatbed?



 
Reply With Quote
 
CSM1
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      25th Apr 2007
"Talal Itani" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:l3tXh.3332$nR1.2671@trnddc06...
>
> "CSM1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:eqsXh.43$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> "Talal Itani" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> newsDmXh.9830$no.4774@trnddc02...
>>>
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> On Apr 23, 3:15 am, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>> My old HP scanner finally quit all the way. So I went to Newegg, and
>>>>> I
>>>>> found two really inexpensive scanners: Canon LiDE 25 is for $44.77,
>>>>> Canon
>>>>> LiDE 70 is for $89.88. I will not be scanning any photographs, since
>>>>> I have
>>>>> a digital camera. Yet every once in a while I scan a document. These
>>>>> Canon
>>>>> scanners seem to have good reviews. Yet I am wondering, why are they
>>>>> so
>>>>> inexpensive? What do I lose? Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Talal Itani
>>>>
>>>> The only problem with LiDE's is that by nature they have very limited
>>>> depth of field, and are pretty much useless for scanning anything
>>>> other than flat paper. If you want to scan jewelry or other small 3d
>>>> objects, get another type of scanner.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I will only scan black and white text documents. Even with that I am
>>> worried, $44.77 is an amazing price for a scanner. By the way, can
>>> jewelry be scanned with a scanner?

>>
>> Absolutely, if the scanner's sensor is a CCD type.
>> Just look at jewelry on Ebay.
>>
>> A lot of the jewelry is from a scanner. Some are from a digital camera.
>>

>
> This is very interesting. If the jewelry is flat, like a coin, I can see
> how it can be scanned. But, what about rings, bracelets, can they also be
> scanned with a flatbed?
>
>



Yes, them too.

A CCD sensor had a fair amount of Depth of Field, and focuses up to about an
inch of so from the top of the Platen.

How far the focus extends is specific to the scanner.
My Canon Canoscan 8400F goes to about 1/2 inch above the platen.

--
CSM1
http://www.carlmcmillan.com
--


 
Reply With Quote
 
PCLIVE
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      8th May 2007
> Talal Itaniwrote:
"CSM1" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:eqsXh.43$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> This is very interesting. If the jewelry is flat, like a coin, I

can see
> how it can be scanned. But, what about rings, bracelets, can they

also be
> scanned with a flatbed?


Yes, but as others have said, you will need a CCD scanner in order to
get a good scanned image. The LiDE 25 and LiDE 70 both use a CIS
(Contact Image Sensor) for scanning. The CanoScan 8600F uses a CCD
for scanning.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon lide 60 george fox Scanners 2 8th Jun 2007 04:01 AM
Canon lide 50 update Martin ©¿©¬ @REMOVETHIS.plus.com Scanners 1 22nd Apr 2005 03:27 PM
Canon lide 35 v 50 Martin ©¿©¬ @REMOVETHIS.plus.com Scanners 1 25th Mar 2005 02:03 PM
Canon LiDE 35 vs 50? slob Scanners 5 13th Oct 2004 05:50 AM
Canon Lide 20/Lide 30 Scanner =?Utf-8?B?Tmljb2xlIFI=?= Windows XP Hardware 1 22nd Aug 2004 06:12 AM


Features
 

Advertising
 

Newsgroups
 


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:03 PM.