Canon LiDE200 Color Image Scanner (2924B002) Reviews

• Better than older models

  
  By A3FKQQTSMHOCE0 on 2008-09-11
  I decided to replace my old "all in one" printer which I was using as a scanner and a photocopying with the Canon LIDE200. I liked the specification: 4800x4800 dpi and a claimed 11 second scan rate.
  
  The first thing I noticed as I was unpacking the scanner from the box was a mysterious WARNING about unlocking the lid of the scanner. The scanner was packed with the lid unlocked (as I found out later), and the instructions mentioned to keep the lid locked for travel or extensive handling. Fair enough, but it made me wonder if I had already done something bad to my scanner (I hadn't).
  
  I then installed the software. I expected big things from Canon here, because generally they are pretty smart about software. The software, in terms of use, is much better than the software I had for scanning with my old scanner. The scanner has an "easy" setting that basically just scans at 300DPI without a fuss. If you want to scan at full resolution, you have to open the "driver" that exposes a page with all the bells and whistles to let you really fine tune your scan and set the highest resolutions.
  
  All this was fair enough, however I found a few minor disturbing problems with the software. Firstly, once you've opened the "driver", it's not intuitive to figure out how to get back to the "no brainer" mode. Also, when you want to save your scan, it always seems to default to the scanning library it sets up. If you override it, it doesn't stay "changed". This is a slight pain. I always wonder who they hire to test and give feedback, because I always feel like I'm pointing out what should be the "obvious" to large companies like Canon (actually I really love Canon - so take no offense!).
  
  As far as scanning speed is concerned, the scanner does indeed scan a 300 dpi page in about 11 seconds (that's pretty fast folks). However, the estimate does not include the 3 seconds the software takes to respond to the command to begin scanning (I'm running a duo core processor - no slouch) and the few seconds it takes to save the image. All in all, speed is impressive.
  
  Now on to document quality. I tried scanning a few brochures and to be honest, at 300 DPI I wasn't super impressed with the result. So I went into the "driver" at set the scanning at maximum resolution (4800 x 4800). You get a pretty good result at that resolution, but by no means was I blown away. Perhaps more "tweaks" of the driver is needed. I noticed that the scanner attempts to "improve" the picture (which it does) but some of the detail of the text was a little off (brochure had images and text). I wondered if the lid of the scanner was making really good contact. Next time I will add a few pages of plain white paper behind the image and see if it makes a difference.
  
  I tried scanning a printed document, and compared it to a printed document I scanned using my old scanner. I scanned the image to a PDF and low and behold, a major, major improvement (at 300 DPI).
  
  So, I gave the scanner four "stars". Why not five? Well, the software is much easier to use than my old scanner, but still not without a few minor "quirks". This is a great scanner for scanning documents. How well it will actually scan and reproduce a photo is still in question, and perhaps I need to learn how to use the driver software better. I don't think I could scan an original photo without seeing some degradation in quality.
  
  I'd be interested to hear other people's experiences regarding copying photos. I hope I'm wrong in my assessment, because I really expected a 4800x4800 scanner to reproduce "dead on" copies of a photo.
  
  

• Well-priced and feature-rich CanoScan LiDE 200 looks promising

  
  By ASDJRLSE4WRPZ on 2008-09-13
  This scanner is a replacement for my Epson Perfection 2450 Photo, which Epson chose to not support in the Vista 64-bit platform. As usual, with no new driver, another perfectly fine and useful scanner dies due to an operating system upgrade. As my scanning at present is more document based, I decided to try this less expensive option and give Canon a chance.
  
  On first glance, it seems my research has paid off. This scanner was quick and easy to install out of the box. The directions were straightforward and useful. One is first instructed to run the setup CD, then remove and unlock the scanner, and finally to plug in the USB. I did not have the problem of the second reviewer: my lock button was in the lock position when I received it, and was even taped over for security.
  
  The scanner has a small footprint and sleek style, compared to my previous model.
  
  The software is easy to use, although it sometimes seems that too many screens are involved. I believe there are options to streamline this to some extent.
  
  My first function was a one-button copy. My sheet music copied as well as the average commercial copier. (Quality was also much better than a B & W copy on my Epson Stylus CX4800 all-in-one.) The pencil marks, however, were very light on the copy, and barely readable. Original highlighting on the piece was gone.
  
  I then performed a one-button scan of the same music. It took about 16 seconds, including software linking. This time the music detail was also excellent and pencil marks were very readable. After the scan, I sent it to the printer where the music quality remained, pencil marking remained strong, and highlighting was preserved.
  
  One note regarding one-button functions: as the second reviewer noted, after choosing a one-button function a CanoScan-generated option list appears requiring the user to "Select program to launch for this action". On my computer there are four options, and I must choose MP Navigator EX from the list. I thought that after the first time I chose the launch program that it would be remembered. It wasn't, so I searched every screen and the user guide, and have not found a way to alter this. It is a definite nuisance that I hope Canon will fix with an update soon.
  
  When scanning, one must place the object upside down on platen to receive a vertical product. In general, the platen is roomy, allowing all but about 1mm on each side left to right of useable space. From cursory scans, it appears there is very little surface area that will not be useable on this scanner (unlike my Epson), which equates to less fidgeting with the original on placement.
  
  Unlike the previous reviewer, once I changed my default file location for saves, all my auto scans saved to that location.
  
  I also haven't found the buttons to be hard to press, or to move the scanner (I have a glass desktop). I do find that after you press the button there is a small lag time before the scan operation begins, so it's easy to think you didn't really press it hard enough.
  
  There is no light on the scanner, as it is always on when the computer is, since it is powered by the USB, not a power cord.
  
  I scanned an 8x10 professional color portrait on auto scan, with the following results:
  - it saved to my correct location, with a subfolder created by current date (a changeable option)
  - the end file size was 1533 kb (auto mode scans at 300 dpi)
  - only 1-2 mm of the photo was cut off by auto cropping...a very acceptable result
  - the detail and quality seemed excellent on the screen
  
  In general, cropping has been very precise on photos and documents.
  
  I did scan a book to test the shadow reduction feature and was disappointed. Not only was there still a shadow, but the text was unreadable at the center. I did successive scans, pressing harder on the spine first with the scanner lid, and then under the lid with my hand, with little overall improvement. Later, I found on option in the software to "turn on" the shadow adjustment, so I tried the scan again with no improvement. Perhaps there is more to be discovered still with the software to implement this feature properly...
  
  As I haven't had a new scanner for a number of years, I decided to try the OCR function, hoping that perhaps the industry had made strides in this regard. It was sorely lacking, making profuse spelling errors, handling italics and small caps fonts poorly. Overall, still a dysfunctional function.
  
  My one pause for concern that caused me to give this scanner only four stars is a glitch that occurred with the scanner's hardware interface. After successfully scanning for 1-2 hours straight without any system flaws, I left the computer for an hour or so. Upon coming back and trying a one-button function I received a ScanGear Error: "Cannot communicate with scanner, Cable may be disconnected or scanner may be turned off. Check status, scanner driver will be closed." I closed and reopened software, and restarted the computer. No improvement. The scanner did not show up on Device Manager. Finally I removed and replaced the USB connection to the computer and the scanner was again recognized. There was no function made by a user; however, perhaps a screen saver coming on or the computer going into sleep mode may have initiated this error. I am hoping this is not a repetitive problem.
  
  I waited several weeks to purchase this scanner, and the first review was slow to come. I finally decided to purchase and provide a review for others--a risk these days, especially with Vista 64. Overall, I think this will be a good product. It is certainly fast--much faster than my Epson--and a step saver for anyone with consecutive documents to scan.
  
  
  

• Works beautifully and quick set-up

  
  By A2JHPKY90F6UHT on 2008-09-05
  Love this scanner. Had it unboxed and set up on my iMac in 5 minutes. Easy button access for email or copying works great. You definately get great value for the dollar, and the fact that it doesn't need AC power makes it even better.
  
  

• Nice little scanner with some limitations

  
  By A3U7H564I0T55A on 2008-10-03
  My Epson Perfection 4490 was the best scanner I ever owned--for the first year. At two years it has become dysfunctional. Back when it worked it did great transparencies, but it was a feature I rarely used.
  So I was willing to get the little CanoScan LiDE 200. I'm tempted to give it three stars, but I'll go with the premise that the compactness comes at a price.
  The Canon installed easily enough in Windows XP. On my desktop computer it runs pretty quickly. The software has some inconveniences relative to the Epson (when the Epson worked). The Canon can zoom in better for cropping on previews. I could not find a 4800 dpi setting, although I can set it to 1200 dpi and magnify. For scanning documents and prints this much resolution is rarely needed. Scans look sharp at 600 dpi, but a bit soft at 1200.
  The illumination and detectors that make it compact and make it possible to be powered by the USB cord are different from the models that have their own power cord. The source material has to be right against the glass to scan sharply. If there is a gap it will be out of focus. Scanning from my laptop (done mainly for experimental purpose) is very slow.
  The Canon scans upside down, compared to other scanners I have used. It seems strange at first, but it makes sense. It allows you to align the top of the document to the edge that is closest to you.
  In the advanced driver mode, for making black and white scans it is possible to adjust the sensitivity. The Epson could do that too. Some HP's that I owned before the Epson couldn't.
  For now the LiDE 200 does what I want well enough with a little bit less clutter than some bulkier scanners. The bulkier scanners do have more capability.
  
  Edit: New laptop experiment
  When I first tried the CanoScan 200 with my laptop, I plugged it into my Kensington 4 port hub. That performance was very sluggish.
  For my new experiment I unplugged the hub and attached the CanoScan's USB cable directly to a laptop port. Performance was greatly improved, comparible to the desktop.
  On my desktop computer I have an abundance of USB ports (I have a PCI card full of them installed), so I have not experimented with a USB hub and the desktop. My laptop experiments were done with the laptop powered by its AC adapter.
  
  
  

• Does not work with Vista on Dell Latitude E6400

  
  By A2O8BNGQ571CZ3 on 2008-11-14
  This scanner looked promising. Nice footprint, easy user interface. Despite stating it is totally compatible with Vista however, it would not work at all with my new Dell Latitude E6400. After 4 hours on the telephone with both Canon and Dell, their technicians also concluded that it just would not work.
  
  This was an incredibly frustrating experience, although Canon's technical support was pretty thorough.
  
  

• Belkin F3U133-10 Hi-Speed USB 2.0 Cable (10 Feet)
• Belkin USB 2.0 4-Port Ultra Mini Hub F5U407
• SANYO eneloop 4 Pack AA NiMH Pre-Charged Rechargeable Batteries
• Case Logic Compact Portable Hard Drive Case (Black)
• La Crosse Technology BC-900 AlphaPower Battery Charger