Canon announced the CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner, their highest-resolution photo image scanner. The CanoScan 9000F features built-in professional film scanning, 9600 x 9600 dpi color resolution, Auto Scan Mode, Auto Document Fix, seven “EZ Buttons”, a white LED which eliminates warm-up time, and FARE Level 3 technology which delivers automatic dust and scratch removal. The CanoScan 9000F can also scan up to four 35mm slides or 12 35mm filmstrips at one time.
The Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner is available for $249.99.
Canon CanoScan 9000F Color Image Scanner Press Release
Related Content:
All Canon User Reviews
All Scanner User Reviews
Digital Imaging and Computers Forum
More Canon News, Reviews, and Articles
Canon Web Site
Why do you even bother to publish crap like this? All you’re doing is blindly quoting the Canon marketing idiots. Totally fucking USELESS!
The Canon Corporation has fully demonstrated their truthful reliability in all things relating to their products. When they have erroneously overstated a products value they have been quick to recant publicly, thus advertising their errors. They have always presented their products within an overview prospective that was thought to be truthful by their product design and development engineers – and professional photographers – they were not mad public simply by marketing executives.
And I DO think that the Nikon Corporation has maintained the same high quality standards. No matter what anyone believes, these two technocratic corporations are at the pinnacle of a technical art form that utilizes and depends on the magic of light as its foundation.
I have yet so see a hands-on review, but will bet anything that the increased ‘resolution’ of 9K dpi will turn out to be completely fictitious. Most flatbeds in this price range are good for an HONEST 1200 optical dpi or so – anything beyond that is oversampled noise or interpolated junk.
Painting Canon as some noble corporation is a bit of a joke, I’m afraid to say. The 8800f is advertised as 4800 dpi, but falls FAR short. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
JoeSixpack has champagne taste and a large chip on his shoulder can you prove the dpi stats you quote did your daddy beat you when you were little why the vile language there are no noble corporations but you need some lessons in nobility and humility yourself why do you insult this site and a scanner you have not used yourself , do you think everyone can afford thousands of dollars for a scanner what a photo snob , i bet you only like the best full frame dslr,s also, stop reading this site if you do not believe the site or canon .
Hey Joe,
Your partly right. But the basic info as listed is accurate.
Here is a detailed review of the 9000F.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/CS9000/9000F.HTM
Enjoy.
I agree with Joe Sixpack to a degree. A 9600 dpi sensor is useless when backed up with crappy optics. Show me a MTF chart that proves this scanner will capture true 9600 dpi and I’ll believe it. I’ve already seen a review that stacks this scanner up against other models including the old FS4000US. The old 4800 dpi FS4000 produces noticeably sharper images *unsharpened* than the 9000F and it’s ilk. Why? The FS4000US had better optics than the garbage installed in most flatbed scanners.
Pheron – where did you see this “review”? In your dreams? If not, how bout sharing. Just blurting stuff out and claiming to have support is BS.
7 EZ Buttons, 9600 dpi CCD Sensor, Auto Document Fix, Auto Scan Mode, Built-In Power Supply, FARE Level 3, Film Scanning (35mm film/120 format film), Gutter Shadow Correction, High-speed Scanning, Light Guide, OCR Text Data Conversion, PDF Password, Sensor Carriage, Super Toric Lens, White LED, Zero Warm-up Time2
Available on the market since a few months, the Canon CanonScan has proven itself a worthy successor of the 8800F.
A resolution of 9600dpi for film scanning is claimed. Don’t expect to achieve this enormous values in practice, but the CCD sensors capture enough details for large printing.
The white LEDs are a bright, but energy saving light source, that needs no warm-up time.
The 9000F is quiet, fast and comfortable to use. It scans also any original, reflective as well as transmissive material; different film holders are included.
The scanner i available for around $ 240,- Wow, what a prize.
Remember how expensive the quality scanners were some years ago.
It seems, that the 9000F is bundled with SilverFast in europe, unfortunately not in the US.
SilverFast is the best scanner software you can get, but it’s quite expensive.
http://www.silverfast.com/product/Canon/729/en.html
I recommend the CanoScan 9000F to anyone looking for an all-round device, at least taking also the cheapest SilverFast SE version.
Ambitious photographers should update to a higher version including IT8 color calibration for a color-true CMS.
If you’re going to scan no photographies at all, but 35mm slides and negatives only,
then a dedicated film scanner like the Plustek 7600i would be the better choice.
best
Katzman J.
Joe Sixpack’s skepticism is uncalled for. A true pro knows that scanning resolutions isn’t just limited to the scanner’s optical resolution, but rather the computer’s hardware and software’s ability to open and edit the enormous bitmap files resulting from such resolutions.
From actual experience with this particular model and Canon’s LiDE 700 I can testify that their declared optical resolution is valid for actual use, only it produces giant files, whic not every PC configuration is capable of opening.
In order to be able to open and edit a 9600 DPI scanned stamp for instance, you’ll probably need at least 4 Giga RAM and a decent photo editing package, because the file-size resulting is larger than 100 MB encapsulated, and may open to occupy some 6 to 800 MB of RAM when active on an editing mode.
For scanning any area larger than the size of a postage stamp, you’ll probably need an industrial workstation configuration.
The main issue in today’s top-notch scanners is in my opinion not the resolution as most scans beyond 1200 DPI is for highly specialised jobs such as fabric quality control, antique coin inspection and such. The main issue is colour dynamics and fidelity, not the appearent resolution.
Hardly any home user scans much beyond 3 to 600 DPI for day-to-day jobs. So as far as colour dynamics and quality are concerned, I can testify from personal experience that both 900 and 700 models are superb, compared to any desktop flatbed, at any price – yes – at any price.
As some kind of power user for the last 25 years, I used all kinds of top level scanners for both reflective and trtansparancies objects, by several makers – canon is very serious in their design in the sense of botttom-line practicality.
There are dedicated scanners for tens of thousands, as there are state of the art general use scanners for thousands, all mucho dinero spending, which can hardly claim superior specs to those two models.
Then again, some individuals and firms will flash their spending for mere show-off and very little intention as far as serious down-to-business approach in their actual work. If only in that sense alone, Canon’s is a flat-out bargain.
Just for reference: a square inch (about the size of a postage stamp) scanned with 9600 DPI, will result as a 92 megapixel picture. Is your PC up to it ? – a whole A4 page scanned in that resolution is way out of range for most PCs – bnesides, it would take a few hours to complete just one such scan