Microtek Scanmaker i900 Review

[Jeffrey Zweig]

Hi Everyone,

I've gotten quite a few emails inquiring about the i900 and how I like it so I've decided to post the review of the scanner that I submitted to Amazon to hopefully answer some questions on it! I am somewhat biased as I've had a history of great products with Microtek but I try to be independent in my reasoning on why I like it!

Sandra

-------

I've been waiting for this scanner for months and months but it has been worth the wait. I had it on pre-order and have finally got the opportunity to get it. I was eyeing the Microtek 6800 for quite some time but decided to hold out for a legal sized scanner that also had positive and negative capabilities. I was also impressed with the price point of $599 MSRP. I was expecting it to push $799 or more based on the speculated features but was pleasantly surprised when the vendor told me.

With that being said I received the scanner yesterday and immediately torn into it. I am impressed with the physical construction of the unit. The scanner has metal railings inside and is quite solid. Nothing appears cheap or thrown together and I appreciate knowing that its not just plastic that was formed together last week. The scanner is both firewire and USB 2.0 so I chose to hook it up via firewire as most of my USB ports were tied up with PDA, Printer, Mouse/Keyboard, Smart Card Reader, etc. Installed the ScanWizard Pro software, restarted the computer and turned on the scanner. Windows XP picked it up and I was able to do a Scanner Test to verify it was working within a few seconds.

Once the scanner was up and running I launched Photoshop CS and then ScanWizard Pro through the File menu. Once it was up I imported my ICM profiles for my monitor and printer. This allows for accurate color reproduction but is not necessary depending on what you are doing with the output. I was very impressed with the time it takes to actually scan. About 10 seconds or less for a preview.

As for the actual scans I was pleasantly surprised. I have a dedicated slide scanner but it doesn't do large format items. I bought a piece of anti-newton ring glass and used it to flatten my items between the 8x10 glass plate that is included. This insures that the image is completely flat while maintaining the benefits of the i900's glassless positive and negative scanning. Scanning at a modest 1200 PPI I was surprised at the quality that I got. Reflective scans of course came out even better. I for one am very impressed with the optics of this unit.

As for the main feature, Digital ICE I can honestly say that this too is superb. I've read online how Digital ICE used to take almost half an hour to accomplish, this scanner does it in roughly a fourth of that time. The images that Microtek has online appear close to what I am getting with the i900. It saves me a considerable amount of time inside Photoshop and on the three photos I've tried they required little to no cleanup work beyond Digital ICE.

All in all I'm very pleased with my purchase. This will compliment my Artixscan 4000 quite nicely. I couldn't have asked for more and it delivers on everything it promises!

[Jeffrey Zweig]

Forgot to add this but if you're reading this Raul I wanted to check and see how you're doing with your i900. Sandra and I constantly try different programs such as Silverfast, Vuescan, ScanWizard Pro, etc. on our different scanners to try to see which gives the best possible scans. I forgot to mention that in the email as well.

[Ken Lee]

Jeffrey -

It would be great if you could post some sample scans, or place them somewhere on the web.

[Ken Lee]

Oh - Forget that request.. I just read your comments in "Microtek i900 for scanning 4X5?"

[QT Luong]

My understanding was that ICE is only for reflective, not transparency scanning on the i900, correct ?

[MattO]

Call me a doubting Thomas, but I am VERY skeptical of all these claims about $500 scanners being incredibly wonderful - particularly these DMax numbers and trumped up resolution claims.

3200 , 4800, interpolation that sound like astronomical distances between planetary bodies.. I just don't buy it.

Why are scanners like the Epson 1680 Pro still selling (quite well, as a matter of fact) for $1200 if these econo-wonders are so good?

Meet me in Missouri........

[Todd Caudle]

Yeah, MattO, and I think the moon is made out of cheese, because I haven't been there to see for myself. Why don't you find someone who has one of these lesser machines set up properly and try it out? They're not drum scanners, but they're not 30K, either. They do a remarkable job for the money. Comparatively, they'd be worth it at twice the price. (Shhh, don't tell Epson/Microtek/Canon, et al.!)

[MattO]

Such a witty response! I notice that you poke, but do not say that you have experience of their capabilities, nor that you have ever used one.

Go back to photo.net and troll there.

[Graeme Hird]

Well I had better defend Todd here.

I use the Epson 2450 to scan 5x4 Velvia trannies. The files are resampled down to print at around 30 inches on the long side (though I do have a few that are 35 inches). Prints are from a lightjet printer on Kodak Endura Metallic paper.

I'm very happy with them. My customers are very happy with them - they've managed to buy 330 of them since September last year. They've paid for my scanner 100 times over.

Would you like any more information from a person who uses a cheap scanner regularly?

Cheers, Graeme

[Edward (Halifax,NS)]

How long until I can buy one for $100 on eBay?