I concur on the Scanwit. I had one and liked it a lot (once I got past some
minor installation challenges, mostly user error). In fact, through a
bizarre set of circumstances where I am having challenges returning it, I
suppose I'd sell the brand-new one sitting on my desk for what I paid for it
(right at $400). If anyone is interested, let me know.
Tom
> Yo,
>
> on Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:31:16 PDT, Lex Jenkins wrote:
>
> >optics, which are reportedly quite good. And while the HP PhotoSmart and
> >Canoscan 2710 have solid followings, they are more expensive. On my
budget
> >even an extra hundred bucks is a big deal. That could buy me a bigger
hard
>
> Lex,
>
> you might want to have a look at the Acer ScanWit 2720S. Over here, it is
> about 40 heaper than the Canon 2710 while IMHO being technically at
least
> on par with it, and beats the HP Photo Smart S20 (which is also more
> expensive, though not as much as the Canon or the Nikon) hands down, not
to
> mention the ES-10. I have one here and like it a lot; IMHO presently you
> can't get more bang for the buck in a film scanner than with the ScanWit.
It
> also came with Photoshop LE included, which is an excellent piece of
> software. All the photos in my gallery pages have been scanned with it, as
> well as my TOPE 1 and 2 entries (though the resolution of scans intended
for
> WWW pages, of course, does neither do justice to the original negs/slides
> nor to the ScanWit).
>
>
> MtFbwy,
> Volkhart
>
> --
> Volkhart Baumgaertner email: kyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> MausNet: @MGN
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|