Id like to know what you guys would expect to be the better Scanner?
The Microtek 1000xl or the
Epson 10000XL
Which one is better and why? I know that Microtek has made a claim of higher optical quality and Dmax however is this an exaggeration.
Any comments or opinions would be appreciated.
Justin
I bet you ten bucks you won't get a real answer here. You have asked this question basically about 6 times.
The answer is both are good and both are not really that good. Now stop trolling.
Last edited by Doug Dolde; 5-Aug-2006 at 21:47.
Hahaha. Thanks Doug. Nice Guy.
Yes I have been trying to get a response. I thought perhaps someone might be able to share some insight as to which might actually have the slight edge since both are so similarlly priced.
Perhaps some opinions about value and which might give you more for our hard earned money.
Best Reguards,
Justin
Buy both and try them. Then return the lesser of the two.
Better for what?
Justin, see my latest response in the other tread you started.
Doug, buy from Amazon and carefully unpack. You can try and return within 30 days.
Hello Justin,
The MicroTek claims, and even the Dmax claim on that particular Epson are not accurate; they do represent the theoretical hardware limitations; not exactly a lie, but not reality.
Better for a business doing lots of scanning? Neither
Okay for a hobbiest on a budget? pick one
Okay for website scanning or FPO? either one
If you are scanning as a business, I have heard of a few using the Epson 10000XL, but they are the rare exceptions. The scans per hour rating on that Epson, and the MicroTek, are just not up to a high volume business environment. You also have to consider cleaning or service, with both of these needing to be sent away for anything. Since you would need to send out for cleaning or service, that means that unless you want to stop offering scanning as a business while awaiting return from servicing, you would need to buy two scanners for your business. If you look at the pricing of two of either, you could get into a used Creo or Screen high end flatbed.
The difference on the Creo (and if I remember correctly the Screen Cezanne) is that the glass can be pulled up by the user for cleaning. Also, both companies are very good and quick with service, meaning that your downtime is minimal enough that you would not need a back-up scanner for your business.
Okay, so what if you are just a fine art enthusiast, and not scanning much each year? Then service would be less of an issue going the Epson or MicroTek (or UMAX or Canon) route. Rather than just arbitrarily picking a scanner, figure out how many scans each year you might need. Then find out what a lab would charge you to scan those on a good high end flatbed or drum scanner. Figure that yearly amount, or perhaps twice that on a lesser scanner, as your scanner budget. If you don't need many scans, there is an advantage to having a good place doing the scans on equipment more expensive than you want to get; instead of buying your own scanner.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
A G Studio
Last edited by Gordon Moat; 6-Aug-2006 at 11:39.
Gordon, cleaning the glass is only the beginning of the diferences between the Creo/Screen flatbeds and the Epson/Microtek flatbeds (with the exceptionof the professional Microte 6000xy). Perhaps the most important difference is that the Creo/Screen scanners scan in both the x and y axis and that their stated resolution and Dmax numbers are bothmuch higher and real as opposed to marketing hype; other important differences are the software, the speed, accuracy of their stepping motors, build quality, type oflamp used, quality of the optics, etc.
Hello Ted,
Absolutely agree, though I did not want to add in more technical information that is well covered in other threads on this Forum. Basically, I chose to mention working factors important in a business environment, namely scans per hour and user servicable features. I know on the Creo scanners even the illumination can be replaced by the end user, and you can probably clarify that on your Screen scanner.
I guess it would help to state another opinion I have about choices. Namely that a medium volume enthusiast might find that a high end flatbed costs less over many years usage. Compare constantly buying $2000 to $3000 medium range scanners that are less capable, less servicable (or just slower), to just purchasing one high end flatbed, and the better Creo, Screen, or Fuji scanners can be more economical to own over a few years . . . not even mentioning that the results are better.
I know a few places running Creo EverSmart, or even old Scitex (prior to Creo purchase) scanners for five or more years. Those scanners might not be as good as the newest models, but it is impressive to see these in a business environment still going year after year. There is even one printing company I know that has a Screen Cezanne in use for the last three years without any failures. When you think of the lower volume many photography enthusiasts might put one of these to, it would not be unreasonable to consider a newly purchased Creo or Screen lasting five or six years . . . . Would Epson or MicroTek even service a five years old scanner, or would you even want it serviced?
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
A G Studio
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks