Rating: 
Summary: Not worth for the price..
Review: Photo scanning: Quality is very low. We can see the "paper texture".Negative scanning: Too much on the blue side. Even with "auto calibration", all scans turns out blueish. Quality is soso. Software: One of the worst software package. The software are soo basic, you can't do anything special or configure the scanner correctly. NOT RECOMMENDED.
Rating: 
Summary: If document scanning & OCR are important - try another
Review: Picked up the Canon ScanoJet 5500F from a local store and started scanning medical school applications. I hoped to fill out these converted applications later using Microsoft Word. So this review is focused primarily on the OCR and text scanning capability of this scanner. Image Quality - 5/5 stars:
The 5000F scans are very detailed and clear. If the document is to be a copy for archving in JPEG or BMP format, the scan quality is more than sufficient. Speed - 3/5 stars:
Scanning a typical letter size document took about 90 seconds at 300 DPI. This is acceptable but not as fast as the comparably priced HP Scanjet 5400. Software 2/5 stars:
The OCR wizard is overtly complex, with at least 6-10 menu steps to scan, recognize, translate, and save one page of document. While the scan took about 90 seconds, the whole process took approximately 5 minutes - the output result was not nearly as clean as an automatic graphic scan, then manual OCR conversion. OCR 1.5/5 stars:
The bundled character recognition software Omnipage SE performs poorly on both text pages and forms. The software has a tendency to add non-existent punctuations, misform letters, and misalign paragraphs and texts. When scanning an inkjet document, the error grows exponentially since the characters lack the sharpness of laser prints; sample text printed using HP Photosmart 7350 lead to about 5% spelling/typo error. This makes editing Canon 5000F scanned documents a very tedious task; for comparison, the HP Scanjet 5400 & HP software completed the scans on the same documents with no errors. When working with forms, the OCR converted approximately 20% of the form accurately into Microsoft Word. Check boxes are often converted as big block letter "O", sometimes as a graphic, rarely as a check box. Overall very poor performance. Recommendation:
If your scanner will primarily serve as a photo/graphic scanner, then this is a great value. If the document management feature in a scanner is important, I recommend looking into an HP scanner; there is a trade off - HP Scanners tend to trail Canon in graphic/film reproduction quality.
Rating: 
Summary: Scanner Reset & Computer reboot
Review: The Canon 5000F scanner provides high quality scans at a reasonable price. Being a professional photographer and newspaper cartoonist for 15 years, I've worked with numerous scanner models ranging from HP and Epson to even Microtek units. Yet, for the price, Canon outperforms them all with a "print-perfect" optical resolution of 2400x4800 dpi. I mostly use the scanner for digitalizing my artwork at a resolution of 1200dpi at an output scale of 100%. The scans appear crisp and clear with well-defined gray tones and contrast levels. Given the ease of the scanning software, it's simple to make a slight adjustment during the pre-scan to change the contrast and brightness to fit your needs. Also, the Canon 5000F is a well-built unit. All low-priced scanners consist of a plastic body for weight purposes, however, the Canon 5000F employs a solid and sturdy drive unit to guide the movement of the lamp carriage. I previously bought the HP Scanjet 3970 because of its attractive price, but I also quickly discover its cheap construction, worthless 3-month warranty and its loose connections. Thankfully, I was able to return it for a refund. At work, I used an Epson 2400 scanner, a comparable unit, that fell apart from the hinges inward. The Epson 2400 could not reproduce the color of photographs as naturally as the Canon 5000F. When scanning grayscale images, the Epson 2400 also could not detect gray tones as well as the Canon unit. The Canon 5000F wonderfully reproduces the color of photographs and slides when I scan images to be posted on the web. However, for scanning negatives or slides, I use a film scanner to achieve the best results. When scanning negatives on a flatbed scanner, the machine must scan the images at a higher resolution than you intend to print. For example, scanning at 2400dpi will magnify the negative image and allow for decent printing at 600-1200dpi. For beginners or professionals, the Canon 5000F provides excellent results at a reasonable price. There's very little difference in scanning speeds when a person scans an image at high resolutions, because we're talking about an image file 40MB or bigger. I haven't seen where the flimsy HP or Epson models scanned any faster than the Canon models. After all, if you want quality, be patient. It might take 1-2 minutes for a 2400dpi scan of a picture, but you should be pleased with the results. For the best color reproduction, clarity and construction, I highly recommend the Canon 5000F. Note: The Canon LiDE series of slim scanners also provide decent results, but they use a different method of scanning than the Canon 5000F in order to make the scanner 1.5 inches tall. The Canon LiDE series use LEDs for the light source and a contact image sensor (CIS) to capture the scanned image. This system, given the material you're scanning, might not provide you with the color tones you're seeking in order to print large photographs. Instead, the Canon 5000F uses the traditional cold cathode lamp as the light source and a CCD as the scanner element which still provides the best color and grayscale reproduction. Enjoy!
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent Scanner, Excellent Quality
Review: The Canon 5000F scanner provides high quality scans at a reasonable price. Being a professional photographer and newspaper cartoonist for 15 years, I've worked with numerous scanner models ranging from HP and Epson to even Microtek units. Yet, for the price, Canon outperforms them all with a "print-perfect" optical resolution of 2400x4800 dpi. I mostly use the scanner for digitalizing my artwork at a resolution of 1200dpi at an output scale of 100%. The scans appear crisp and clear with well-defined gray tones and contrast levels. Given the ease of the scanning software, it's simple to make a slight adjustment during the pre-scan to change the contrast and brightness to fit your needs. Also, the Canon 5000F is a well-built unit. All low-priced scanners consist of a plastic body for weight purposes, however, the Canon 5000F employs a solid and sturdy drive unit to guide the movement of the lamp carriage. I previously bought the HP Scanjet 3970 because of its attractive price, but I also quickly discover its cheap construction, worthless 3-month warranty and its loose connections. Thankfully, I was able to return it for a refund. At work, I used an Epson 2400 scanner, a comparable unit, that fell apart from the hinges inward. The Epson 2400 could not reproduce the color of photographs as naturally as the Canon 5000F. When scanning grayscale images, the Epson 2400 also could not detect gray tones as well as the Canon unit. The Canon 5000F wonderfully reproduces the color of photographs and slides when I scan images to be posted on the web. However, for scanning negatives or slides, I use a film scanner to achieve the best results. When scanning negatives on a flatbed scanner, the machine must scan the images at a higher resolution than you intend to print. For example, scanning at 2400dpi will magnify the negative image and allow for decent printing at 600-1200dpi. For beginners or professionals, the Canon 5000F provides excellent results at a reasonable price. There's very little difference in scanning speeds when a person scans an image at high resolutions, because we're talking about an image file 40MB or bigger. I haven't seen where the flimsy HP or Epson models scanned any faster than the Canon models. After all, if you want quality, be patient. It might take 1-2 minutes for a 2400dpi scan of a picture, but you should be pleased with the results. For the best color reproduction, clarity and construction, I highly recommend the Canon 5000F. Note: The Canon LiDE series of slim scanners also provide decent results, but they use a different method of scanning than the Canon 5000F in order to make the scanner 1.5 inches tall. The Canon LiDE series use LEDs for the light source and a contact image sensor (CIS) to capture the scanned image. This system, given the material you're scanning, might not provide you with the color tones you're seeking in order to print large photographs. Instead, the Canon 5000F uses the traditional cold cathode lamp as the light source and a CCD as the scanner element which still provides the best color and grayscale reproduction. Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: canon scan 5000f
Review: the scanner is very easy to use but the quality come up short from my exspectations
Rating:
Summary: Scanner Reset & Computer reboot
Review: This scanner is great. Only thing I am not happy is that after around every 10 scanning (photo or negative)It locks out and asks to off & on the scanner. Then after around every 20 scans, it lockscompletely up and have to reboot the pc no two ways about it. I have Sony Vaio Digital Studio.
If any body has any suggestion for this improvement please write to me Pooran9412@yahoo.com
Other wise the quality is great.
Prior to this I bought Epson Scanner, it was quite contrary to what the specification said. I had to return it within two days of trials & baught the Canon 5000F.
Rating:
Summary: Far Exceeded My Expectations!
Review: You can still get this scanner new at eBay or at some camera places. I got it solely because I wanted a film scanner, but could not afford a "real" one. Flatbed scanners are considered inferior for such things. Well, if this scanner is making inferior scans of negatives or slides, I can't tell! I think they are wonderful. It even has the FARE system, which is usually found on more expensive models. The software bundle has loads of photo software, as well as an OCR program. I have used the OCR program once...there were too many words it couldn't read...and I could have typed up the article faster than proofreading the mistakes.But I have not read up on everything yet, mainly because there is no printed manual, only a Quick Start Guide. But at least the QSG tells you more than most. It's still confusing at times, though. Even things I've done before can be confusing to repeat. It's just not the easiest software on the face of the Earth.But as I said, it scans negatives and slides beautifully, as well as photos. It does far better with photos than my HP All-In-One. It should, however, since it is a photo/film scanner.And it's a nice priced one at that!
Rating:
Summary: Far Exceeded My Expectations!
Review: You can still get this scanner new at eBay or at some camera places. I got it solely because I wanted a film scanner, but could not afford a "real" one. Flatbed scanners are considered inferior for such things. Well, if this scanner is making inferior scans of negatives or slides, I can't tell! I think they are wonderful. It even has the FARE system, which is usually found on more expensive models. The software bundle has loads of photo software, as well as an OCR program. I have used the OCR program once...there were too many words it couldn't read...and I could have typed up the article faster than proofreading the mistakes.But I have not read up on everything yet, mainly because there is no printed manual, only a Quick Start Guide. But at least the QSG tells you more than most. It's still confusing at times, though. Even things I've done before can be confusing to repeat. It's just not the easiest software on the face of the Earth.But as I said, it scans negatives and slides beautifully, as well as photos. It does far better with photos than my HP All-In-One. It should, however, since it is a photo/film scanner.And it's a nice priced one at that!
Rating:
Summary: Far Exceeded My Expectations!
Review: You can still get this scanner new at eBay or at some camera places. I got it solely because I wanted a film scanner, but could not afford a "real" one. Flatbed scanners are considered inferior for such things. Well, if this scanner is making inferior scans of negatives or slides, I can't tell! I think they are wonderful. It even has the FARE system, which is usually found on more expensive models. The software bundle has loads of photo software, as well as an OCR program. I have used the OCR program once...there were too many words it couldn't read...and I could have typed up the article faster than proofreading the mistakes.But I have not read up on everything yet, mainly because there is no printed manual, only a Quick Start Guide. But at least the QSG tells you more than most. It's still confusing at times, though. Even things I've done before can be confusing to repeat. It's just not the easiest software on the face of the Earth.But as I said, it scans negatives and slides beautifully, as well as photos. It does far better with photos than my HP All-In-One. It should, however, since it is a photo/film scanner.And it's a nice priced one at that!
| 
