Epson V700/ HP SJ 8300

[deloid]

I have an older Hp scanjet6300c that I use to scan photos. I run my
negatives through a Nikon coolscan 9000. The quality of scanning smaller
photos on my HP is fair to poor even at 1200 dpi (viewed at a reduced size).
I need to get a new flatbed because of vista and I'm thinking Epson V700
versus HP SJ 8300, considering image quality over speed.which have you
preferred (for those that looked at both)? I'm certain both should produce a
better image than my current scanner.



Thanks for any advise-

 

[-]

From your post it, sounds like you are looking for a new scanner to just do
reflective scanning of documents, etc., but that you won't have any need to
scan film since you have a 9000. If true, I don't see any need for you to
buy a V700. A $70-$100 Canon or Epson scanner will scan reflective
materials just fine.

Doug

 

[tomm42]

I have an older Hp scanjet6300c that I use to scan photos. I run my
negatives through a Nikon coolscan 9000. The quality of scanning smaller
photos on my HP is fair to poor even at 1200 dpi (viewed at a reduced size).
I need to get a new flatbed because of vista and I'm thinking Epson V700
versus HP SJ 8300, considering image quality over speed.which have you
preferred (for those that looked at both)? I'm certain both should produce a
better image than my current scanner.

Thanks for any advise-

The V700 is a fine scanner, film or flatbed. Would be interested to
see how it matches up with an LS9000, it beat out my LS2000, the
LS9000 is two generations father on in Nikon design, so it should put
the V700 in its place.
Unless you are trying hard to increase the size of your photos,
standard 4x6 prints don't do well scanned over 300ppi. The detail just
isn't there. I'll sometimes do 600 ppi if I want to increase the
overall size of the print, but not higher.

Tom

 

[deloid]

The V700 is a fine scanner, film or flatbed. Would be interested to
see how it matches up with an LS9000, it beat out my LS2000, the
LS9000 is two generations father on in Nikon design, so it should put
the V700 in its place.
Unless you are trying hard to increase the size of your photos,
standard 4x6 prints don't do well scanned over 300ppi. The detail just
isn't there. I'll sometimes do 600 ppi if I want to increase the
overall size of the print, but not higher.

Tom

So it seems that you and Doug say the same thing in two different ways. Just
out of curiosity then...will a new inexpensive scanner get better detail out
of a wallet sized print at 300 than my current scanjet 6300?

 

[tomm42]

So it seems that you and Doug say the same thing in two different ways. Just
out of curiosity then...will a new inexpensive scanner get better detail out
of a wallet sized print at 300 than my current scanjet 6300?

I wouldn't get a bottom end scanner, just not built well enough. Epson
has had sales on their 4490 (about $129), a decent midrange consumer
scanner. If you don't need to scan film this is probably the way to
go. I have always had a good scanner to use, I have only used 3
flatbeds, A UMAX Vista S12 built like a tank lasted 10 years until I
switched to Win XP, an Epson Expression 1600 a pro scanner that died
and the V700. So I may not be the best guy to consult on midranged
units.

Tom