Microtek ScanMaker 4900 - Flatbed scanner - 8.5 in x 11.7 in - 2400 dpi x 4800 dpi - USB

Other products by Microtek

Product Details

• Item Weight: 5.7 pounds
• Shipping Weight: 9 pounds
• ASIN: B000066TOQ
• Item model number: 4900
• Average Customer Review: 2.7 out of 5 stars See all reviews (20 customer reviews)
• Date first available at Amazon.com: November 2, 2006

Product Description

Product Description
Microtek's ScanMaker 4900 is an affordable dual-platform multimedia scanner featuring the new slim EDGE Design. It has a high 4800 x 2400-dpi optical resolution and scans at true 48-bit color depth. The ScanMaker 4900 has a Sigma-6 CCD sensor, which features six rows of sensors (instead of the usual three) for enhanced accuracy, clarity, and resolution. The scanner also features 7 Smart-Touch buttons for Scan, Copy, Email, PDF/OCR, Scan-to-Web, Setup/Cancel, and Custom.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

34 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Does it all!, June 25, 2002

By	Fredrick Gutermuth "invisiblemonki" (Honolulu, Hawaii United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I'm mostly using this scanner for web design, and you don't need a lot, for that. But the few times I've had to duplicate some photos, they've turned out wonderfully. Either stand alone (one button functionality) or with the OEM software, it's easy to use. This scanner has me looking for a better printer to take advantage of it's capabilities. And there was nothing else that performed like this for the price. Only thing is, you'll need to cruise the online help, 'cause the provided material is sparse.

19 of 19 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Professional-grade scanner, except for the imaging quality., September 4, 2002

By	Ciocc 1 (PA) - See all my reviews

Microtek has a genuine professional pedigree; for years I saw Microtek scanners at the newspapers I worked for. And the 4900 has the apprearance of being a professional model, with sophisticated adjustments for tweaking color, etc.

It also has some great features for amateurs, such as seven buttons on the scanner that can be customized, so that you could, for example, scan the same photo at 100 dpi, 300 dpi, 600 dpi, 48-bit, 24-bit, tif and jpeg, all without fiddling with the computer.

But the instructions are not written for amateurs, and many features are not clearly explained. The program seems to default to allowing multiple frames, with the result that I got several crop lines on the preview screen I could not get rid of, and multiple images each time I scanned. But don't try looking up "crop" or "auto crop" in the help section - they aren't there. I tried to find out more on the Microtek web site, but it was down.

Earth to Microtek: Look at each of your screens and each of the functions on each screen and write instructions for how to use them for your help section, not just a one-sentence label of what they are.

The bottom line is quality, and the images are not up to par for professionals. I tried using the film adapter and found it worthless, unable to produce sharp images. But what is worse, I discovered that there was heavy horizontal and vertical streaking. At the maximum optical resolution of 2,400 dpi the vertical streaking was about six pixels wide, and was obvious even on the small preview image. This streaking was typically down to about two pixels wide at 1,200 dpi, and was still visable at 600 dpi. When I switched to a grayscale scan it was even more obvious, meaning the light sensitivity of the CCD sensors was inconsistent. There was also horizontal streaking, though less obvious.

When I switch to scanning an opaque subject, the streaking was not quite as obtrusive, but still obvious if you knew what to look for. Since the streaking is visable at 600 dpi, this means the useable resolution of this 2,400 dpi optical scanner is only 300 dpi. At this rate, the images are not even up to par for amateurs.

The color of the scans was good, but I would not call it professional. And it did not seem to me to be exceptionally sharp. Scans are fast, but the scanner is slow to respond, so total time is not so good. Loading the driver after clicking on the icon is agonizingly slow on my 566 mhz Celeron, and there is no "wait" icon.

The OCR program is the worst I have ever tried to use, and I've owned three other scanners.

This may be the right scanner for some people. Basic functions are easy to use - if the scanner does not default to some cryptic mode. But anything more will take several days of experimentation to learn, unless you are a professional. I'm not, and this scanner is going back.

17 of 17 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Good for prints; poor for film, November 27, 2002

By	Jim Beck (Evansville, IN United States) - See all my reviews

If you want a scanner that will allow you to accurately reproduce color photographs and maybe crop a particular section of a print and maintain an acceptable resolution for printing, then this is a good bet. But don't expect to use it to EVER scan a slide or negative that will be worth printing.

If you scan at a resolution worthy of printing a negative, the scanner will leave large streaks throughout the image. And the color will be hit and miss, and even Adobe Photoshop will have trouble correcting the mess this scanner creates. And this is even after using the calibration tool for the LightLid 35 (an included accessory.

Some scans of 35mm film were acceptable for screen display, but nothing else. (To Microtek's credit, they explain that the LightLid is really only meant for the purposes of video display. But this information is NOT included in the product information available to consumers before the purchase. It's also not mentioned in many Web-site reviews.)

Another word of advice to potential consumers. This unit uses a deceptive labeling on resolution. The important number to remember here, of course, is that it's a 2400 by 4800 resolution scanner. Microtek, for some reason, decided to put that larger number first in its product packaging, likely thinking it could fool consumers who buy a product based on nothing more than the "higher number." How disappointed they'll be, I suspect, when they make scans at 4800 and discover fuzzy images.

My advice: If you want a solid performer for doing nothing but scanning in prints, then this will do the job. If you want more accuracy in scanning negatives and film strips, don't waste your time with the included toy. Buy a dedicated film scanner or a brand, even one from Microtek, that has a built-in film scanner.