Ravi Vemuri , Jul 16, 2003; 02:57 p.m.
Hi,
While looking around for scanners, I have come across HP S20xi
scanner which costs less than $100 and yet has good reviews for it's
class. It's a 2400 DPI without Digital ICE but most reviews quote
excellent scan quality. Any comments on this scanner will be highly
appreciated. For people planning to move into digital in a year or so
and for good resonable slide scans, wouldn't this be an appropriate
scanner for short term and cost wise instead of spending $600-$900
and then moving to digital. I know that what we pay is what we get
but from the reviews, it looks like this gives a lot more than what
we pay for. Am I wrong? Any experiences with this scanner?
Kristopher Pfeiffer , Jul 16, 2003; 03:44 p.m.
I have the first HP Photosmart scanner - the SCSI one. According to http://www.imaging-resource.com, the S20 is a big improvement. I think that you'll see a lot of similarities, though. So, here's what I think...
Less than $100? Go for it. You'll get some damn good scans (17meg+ TIFFs from negatives/slides) for the money. Slides look absolutely fantastic.
Dust is my biggest problem. I find myself blowing the thing out quite often with canned air.
The HP Software is terrible. I use Hamrick software's VueScan. It's got some great batch scanning abilities that HP doesn't offer....much more control over scanning parameters, too.
The scan times can be a bit slow - if you're scanning a lot of film, it may try your patience.
With the noted improvements in the S20, I'm thinking about getting one of those. B&H has them for $169 or something like that. Not bad. Digital ICE would be cool, but for the money and the number of scans I do, the HP will do just fine.
Kris
Leonard Evens 
, Jul 16, 2003; 05:33 p.m.
Mine may be a minority voice, but I don't consider the HP adequate for 35 mm. I have one, and I can sometimes, with quite a bit of effort in a photoeditor, produce a barely acceptable 8 x 10 print. I suppose if you have $50-100 to throw away and you don't plan to make larger than 5 x 7 prints, it would be acceptable. It would also be acceptable purely for web use.
The Minolta Dual III doesn't cost a whole lot, about $300, and those who have it speak highly of it. It might suffice for both the short term and the long term.
If you ultimate aim is to get a quality 4000 ppi scanner with ICE, then the HP S20 might be a reasonable choice for the short term. It will certainly give you an opportunity to learn how to massage a scan in a photoeditor, which is an important skill to learn.
David F. Stein , Jul 16, 2003; 11:52 p.m.
I would put a vote in for the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite F-2900. If you can work with
SCSI, there are likely factory refurbished, remaindered units around for less than $200.
2880 dpi. My guess is that tonal range/DMax is not up to the present-day Scan Dual
III, but this is a solid, metal unit, has digital ICE and does up to 16x multi-sampling.
I think it is a good intro to 35mm scanning before heading for the "$1,000" territories
of Nikon, Canon or Minolta. One aside about Vuescan: if it doesn't do as great with a
certain model scanner, Ed Hamrick doesn't give up, I have noticed Vuescan doing much
better with slides on this machine than last year. GOOD LUCK..
Marshall Goff , Jul 17, 2003; 09:19 a.m.
Had one. Upgraded. For $100, you won't beat it, but it is kinda noisy in the shadows and has limited dynamic range. Of course, to beat it cleanly, you'll spend $300+ and to get ICE, you'd spend more than that.
Bill Angel 
, Jul 18, 2003; 03:43 p.m.
I recently purchased the HP Photosmart S20xi and find if quite sufficient for my needs, which at this point consist of scanning images just for uploading to the web. I've used it to scan color negs, B&W negs, and Kodachrome and Ektachrome slides, all with good results. It is slow, however, and I do all my color and contrast adjustments in a separate digital editor, rather than by utilizing the admittedly limited image editing functionality built into the software that comes with the scanner.
