I have a Minolta DimageScan Elite 5400 (the original) hooked up to an older
PC via Firewire. I just purchased a new PC (Photoshop CS2 was running too
slowly on the old machine). The filmscanner has both Firewire and USB
outputs. Can I just hook it up to the new PC via USB 2.0 or will that
damage the Minolta somehow?

Obviously, I wouldn't be scanning to both PCs simultaneously.

Maris

It won't damage it, but do be sure both PCs don't try and print at once.
--
Cari (MS-MVP)
Windows Technologies - Printing & Imaging
http://www.coribright.com/windows

"Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:P_tpi.45502$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I have a Minolta DimageScan Elite 5400 (the original) hooked up to an older
>PC via Firewire. I just purchased a new PC (Photoshop CS2 was running too
>slowly on the old machine). The filmscanner has both Firewire and USB
>outputs. Can I just hook it up to the new PC via USB 2.0 or will that
>damage the Minolta somehow?
>
> Obviously, I wouldn't be scanning to both PCs simultaneously.
>
> Maris
>

"Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:P_tpi.45502$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I have a Minolta DimageScan Elite 5400 (the original) hooked up to an older
>PC via Firewire. I just purchased a new PC (Photoshop CS2 was running too
>slowly on the old machine). The filmscanner has both Firewire and USB
>outputs. Can I just hook it up to the new PC via USB 2.0 or will that
>damage the Minolta somehow?
>
> Obviously, I wouldn't be scanning to both PCs simultaneously.
>
> Maris
>

Hi

I don't know about connecting it to 2 Computers at the same time, but from
my experience it will scan and transfer the files considerably faster on
Firewire than USB2.

If one of your computers does not have a front panel Firewire socket, why
not just get an Extension Cable, so that you can have the female end at the
front of the case, and just connect the scanner to whichever one you want
to use.

Roy G

I was looking at external hard drives as well, for the new computer, and
specs were 400mbps for Firewire and 480mbps for USB 2.0 Perhaps
filmscanners differ.

The new computer has no Fireware connection, front or back. I'd have to
install a Firewire PCI card for it.

Maris

Roy G wrote:
> "Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:P_tpi.45502$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I have a Minolta DimageScan Elite 5400 (the original) hooked up to
>> an older PC via Firewire. I just purchased a new PC (Photoshop CS2
>> was running too slowly on the old machine). The filmscanner has
>> both Firewire and USB outputs. Can I just hook it up to the new PC
>> via USB 2.0 or will that damage the Minolta somehow?
>>
>> Obviously, I wouldn't be scanning to both PCs simultaneously.
>>
>> Maris
>>
>
> Hi
>
> I don't know about connecting it to 2 Computers at the same time, but
> from my experience it will scan and transfer the files considerably
> faster on Firewire than USB2.
>
> If one of your computers does not have a front panel Firewire socket,
> why not just get an Extension Cable, so that you can have the female
> end at the front of the case, and just connect the scanner to
> whichever one you want to use.

"Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:dzQpi.24625$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I was looking at external hard drives as well, for the new computer, and
>specs were 400mbps for Firewire and 480mbps for USB 2.0 Perhaps
>filmscanners differ.
>
> The new computer has no Fireware connection, front or back. I'd have to
> install a Firewire PCI card for it.
>
> Maris
>

Hi.

I also thought USB 2 was faster than Firewire, until I tried using the
Firewire socket for my scanner.

Specifications can be rather misleading, entirely by accident on the part of
the manufacturer, of course.

Roy G

Roy G wrote:
> "Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:dzQpi.24625$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I was looking at external hard drives as well, for the new computer, and
>> specs were 400mbps for Firewire and 480mbps for USB 2.0 Perhaps
>> filmscanners differ.
>>
>> The new computer has no Fireware connection, front or back. I'd have to
>> install a Firewire PCI card for it.
>>
>> Maris
>>
>
> Hi.
>
> I also thought USB 2 was faster than Firewire, until I tried using the
> Firewire socket for my scanner.
>
> Specifications can be rather misleading, entirely by accident on the part of
> the manufacturer, of course.
>
> Roy G
>
>
From: http://www.cwol.com/firewire/firewire-vs-usb.htm

FireWire vs. USB 2.0

FireWire - Still the Performance King!

Question: USB 2.0 is faster than FireWire...right? Answer: No,
actually FireWire is faster than USB 2.0.

Question: Hold on...USB 2.0 is a 480 Mbps interface and FireWire is a
400 Mbps interface, how can FireWire be faster? Answer: Raw
throughput rating numbers alone don't tell the whole story, as
explained below.

The throughput numbers would lead you to believe that USB 2.0
provides better performance. But, differences in the architecture of
the two interfaces have a huge impact on the actual sustained "real
world" throughput. And for those seeking high-performance, sustained
throughput is what it's all about (reading and writing files to an
external hard drive for example).

Architecture - FireWire vs. USB 2.0

*

FireWire, built from the ground up for speed, uses a "Peer-to-Peer"
architecture in which the peripherals are intelligent and can
negotiate bus conflicts to determine which device can best control a
data transfer

*

USB 2.0 uses a "Master-Slave" architecture in which the computer
handles all arbitration functions and dictates data flow to, from and
between the attached peripherals (adding additional system overhead
and resulting in slower, less-efficient data flow control)

Performance Comparison - FireWire vs. USB 2.0 Read and write tests to
the same IDE hard drive connected using FireWire and then USB 2.0
show:

Read Test:

* 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 33% faster than USB 2.0 *
160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 70% faster than USB 2.0

Write Test:

* 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 16% faster than USB 2.0 *
160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 48% faster than USB 2.0

FireWire - Still the Performance King! As the performance comparison
shown above confirms, FireWire remains the performance leader. And
is the best choice for DV camcorders, digital audio and video
devices, external hard drives, high-performance DVD burners and any
other device that demands continuous high performance throughput.

This page, and all contents, are Copyright © 1995 - 2007 by CWOL.com

I believe you, Bruce, and appreciate the detailed information.

Unfortunately, the new computer does not have a Firewire connection, but
then I'm going digital more or less so I don't know that I'll bother picking
up a Firewire connection card. If I go on a road trip and shoot a lot of
film, I'll get one.

To answer my original question myself - didn't work for me. Windows saw the
USB connection to the Minolta 5400, but no TWAIN in PS, DiMage Scan didn't
see the filmscanner nor did Vuescan. Unplugging the Firewire cable from the
scanner cured it, so it's either-or.

Maris

Bruce wrote:
> Roy G wrote:
>> "Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:dzQpi.24625$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I was looking at external hard drives as well, for the new
>>> computer, and specs were 400mbps for Firewire and 480mbps for USB
>>> 2.0 Perhaps filmscanners differ.
>>>
>>> The new computer has no Fireware connection, front or back. I'd
>>> have to install a Firewire PCI card for it.
>>>
>>> Maris
>>>
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> I also thought USB 2 was faster than Firewire, until I tried using
>> the Firewire socket for my scanner.
>>
>> Specifications can be rather misleading, entirely by accident on the
>> part of the manufacturer, of course.
>>
>> Roy G
>>
>>
> From: http://www.cwol.com/firewire/firewire-vs-usb.htm
>
> FireWire vs. USB 2.0
>
> FireWire - Still the Performance King!
>
> Question: USB 2.0 is faster than FireWire...right? Answer: No,
> actually FireWire is faster than USB 2.0.
>
> Question: Hold on...USB 2.0 is a 480 Mbps interface and FireWire is a
> 400 Mbps interface, how can FireWire be faster? Answer: Raw
> throughput rating numbers alone don't tell the whole story, as
> explained below.
>
> The throughput numbers would lead you to believe that USB 2.0
> provides better performance. But, differences in the architecture of
> the two interfaces have a huge impact on the actual sustained "real
> world" throughput. And for those seeking high-performance, sustained
> throughput is what it's all about (reading and writing files to an
> external hard drive for example).
>
> Architecture - FireWire vs. USB 2.0
>
> *
>
> FireWire, built from the ground up for speed, uses a "Peer-to-Peer"
> architecture in which the peripherals are intelligent and can
> negotiate bus conflicts to determine which device can best control a
> data transfer
>
> *
>
> USB 2.0 uses a "Master-Slave" architecture in which the computer
> handles all arbitration functions and dictates data flow to, from and
> between the attached peripherals (adding additional system overhead
> and resulting in slower, less-efficient data flow control)
>
> Performance Comparison - FireWire vs. USB 2.0 Read and write tests to
> the same IDE hard drive connected using FireWire and then USB 2.0
> show:
>
> Read Test:
>
> * 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 33% faster than USB 2.0 *
> 160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 70% faster than USB 2.0
>
> Write Test:
>
> * 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 16% faster than USB 2.0 *
> 160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 48% faster than USB 2.0
>
> FireWire - Still the Performance King! As the performance comparison
> shown above confirms, FireWire remains the performance leader. And
> is the best choice for DV camcorders, digital audio and video
> devices, external hard drives, high-performance DVD burners and any
> other device that demands continuous high performance throughput.
>
> This page, and all contents, are Copyright © 1995 - 2007 by CWOL.com

Maris V. Lidaka Sr. wrote:
> I was looking at external hard drives as well, for the new computer, and
> specs were 400mbps for Firewire and 480mbps for USB 2.0 Perhaps
> filmscanners differ.

Regardless of the spec's, Firewire xfers much faster than USB 2.0.



>
> The new computer has no Fireware connection, front or back. I'd have to
> install a Firewire PCI card for it.
>
> Maris
>
> Roy G wrote:
>> "Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:P_tpi.45502$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I have a Minolta DimageScan Elite 5400 (the original) hooked up to
>>> an older PC via Firewire. I just purchased a new PC (Photoshop CS2
>>> was running too slowly on the old machine). The filmscanner has
>>> both Firewire and USB outputs. Can I just hook it up to the new PC
>>> via USB 2.0 or will that damage the Minolta somehow?
>>>
>>> Obviously, I wouldn't be scanning to both PCs simultaneously.
>>>
>>> Maris
>>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I don't know about connecting it to 2 Computers at the same time, but
>> from my experience it will scan and transfer the files considerably
>> faster on Firewire than USB2.
>>
>> If one of your computers does not have a front panel Firewire socket,
>> why not just get an Extension Cable, so that you can have the female
>> end at the front of the case, and just connect the scanner to
>> whichever one you want to use.
>
>


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.