| Canon CanoScan FB620P scanner preliminary reportFeb. 5/99 I just recently bought a Canon CanoScan FB620P scanner after being 
              disappointed by the UMAX 1220P scanner. Like so many other Canon 
              products I've tried, I was impressed with this one for the price, 
              but there are some shortcomings. The price was $215. Canadian on 
              sale plus tax, less a manufacturers rebate of $80., bringing the 
              price down to $135 plus tax (not bad for a scanner of this quality). 
              I submitted the rebate coupon beyond the deadline, but Canon paid 
              it to me anyway (after a little chasing). I haven't finished testing, 
              but preliminary results are encouraging & the Canon scanner 
              seems to have few of the problems I mention in my UMAX 
              1220P report (except that scan times were about the same). Here 
              is what I've found so far. As you'll see if you click here, 
              the scan resolution of the CanoScan FB620P is noticeably sharper 
              than the UMAX 1220P & almost the equal to the older but more 
              expensive HP Scanjet 3C. This should probably come as no surprise 
              since Canon's area of expertise is optics (though this Canon scanner 
              doesn't use a traditional lens & mirror). I found the Canon 
              CanoCraft CS-P software to be more versatile than the UMAX VistaScan 
              software & it had a much larger preview window as well as automatic 
              white balancing. The size of the Canon scanner is considerably smaller 
              than the UMAX (because of the new CIS imaging technology) making 
              it easier to find a place to put it. There is only 3/4" from 
              the glass to the edge of the cover, which also makes it a little 
              easier to position a book on the scan glass. There was no dirt, 
              debris & greasy finger prints on the underside of the scan glass 
              like there was in the UMAX scanner. The Canon documentation was 
              very good & even was honest enough to note that certain printers 
              might not work properly with this scanner (my HP Deskjet 500 printer 
              worked fine). The CanoScan FB620P scanner has an optical resolution 
              of 600 DPI & a color bit depth of 30 (although I only need 24). 
              An 8.5" X 11" picture at 300 DPI took about 2:27 minutes 
              (147 seconds) to scan in, or with ColorGear Color Matching turned 
              on about 2:52 minutes (172 seconds).  Some recent magazine articles have suggested that the new CIS (Contact 
              Image Sensor) light & image pickup technology (used in the CanoScan 
              FB620P)(Canon calls it LIDE for LED Indirect Exposure) is not yet 
              as good as the older CCD (charge-coupled device) semiconductor chip 
              imaging technology (used in the UMAX 1220P). My experience so far 
              indicates that the resolution of the Canon CanoScan FB620P CIS imager 
              is higher, white/black balanced is better & color accuracy is 
              at least as good as the UMAX 1220P scanner, BUT some new problems 
              have showed up. Here is a reference to these two types of scanning 
              technologies http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/features/scanners98/ccdvscis.html 
             The white & black balance was better than the UMAX. Click 
              here to see a stepped gray scale comparison of white & black 
              balances between the UMAX & Canon scanners. I did 
              notice a slight posterization look on solid gray areas & this 
              showed up on the waveform monitor when I used the stepped gray pictures 
              for video, but the video pictures looked fine. I also noticed solid 
              grays have subtle vertical streaks (probably from inconsistencies 
              in the CIS array). These two gray scale problems may be the same 
              thing & at least one magazine article I've read on this scanner 
              has indicated that gray scale performance on this scanner is weak. 
              I would be inclined to agree, but color performance is quite good.  
              Here is a magazine review on this Canon scanner  http://www.computers.com/reviews/comparative/capsule/0,26,84-2023-643997-683393,00.html?st.co.crr.txt.crc683393 
             I've found that the new CIS imaging technology has extremely 
              limited depth of focus because no lens is used. If 
              the item scanned is not directly in contact with the scan glass, 
              it will be out of focus. Click 
              here to view samples of 
              a cell phone scan by the Canon & UMAX scanners. It seems 
              that for normal pictures the Canon does a better job & for pictures 
              or objects that don't sit flush with the scan glass, the UMAX (or 
              any scanner with a CCD, lens & mirror) does a better job. I 
              guess at this low price you're not going to get everything. The Canon (parallel port) scanner did not disable my HP Deskjet 
              500 printer, although an Inscriber Feature Pak HASP dongle I was 
              using on the parallel port did interfere with the Canon scanner 
              until I changed the motherboard BIOS off the "standard" 
              parallel port setting to the ECP setting. I also noticed that once 
              I had opened the CanoCraft CS-P software, it disables Inscriber, 
              even if Inscriber was already up & running first. I get an Inscriber 
              error message that says "1) block error". The cause of 
              the problem was the HASP dongle. If I reboot, then I can use Inscriber 
              again as long as I don't open the Canon scanning software. The manufacture 
              of the HASP dongle (Aladdin Knowledge Systems)claims that their dongle 
              is completely transparent to other devices, but obviously it isn't. 
              They sent me a parallel port plug in ISA card so I will have two 
              parallel ports as a workaround for the problem their dongle causes 
              with Inscriber when the Canon software is opened. Note that this 
              problem was not caused by the Canon scanner or software. There is a size lock feature in the Canon software that I really 
              like. You can choose the target size (say 720 X 540) & LOCK 
              it to that. Then when you drag the scan box size to cover the area 
              of the preview picture you want to scan, the box aspect stays the 
              same as it changes in size & the scan resolution (DPI or %) 
              automatically adjusts to fit what's needed to achieve the resolution 
              target. After that, all I have to do is scale it down to 720 X 486 
              in PhotoShop before I use it for video. There is also a nice little software feature called ColorGear Color 
              Matching which enhances the picture to have more saturated colors 
              should you want that. Here are examples 
              of how it changes the picture. I have found with this or any scanner, that you often get a better 
              quality picture if you scan it at 600 DPI, then scale it down in 
              Photoshop to the required size. This is particularly true if you 
              are scanning coloured printed material. Sometimes you might even 
              have to apply a blur (under Filter/Blur) in Photoshop for certain 
              halftoned printed material. The Canon scanner also comes with CanoCraft CS-P Copy software 
              which allows you to use your scanner & printer like you would 
              a copy machine. When set to the high resolution scanning resolution, 
              I found that it did a pretty good job in TEXT or GRAY scale mode. By Doug Hembruff.Last updated Feb. 20/99
 |