The specs look fantastic (2700x2700x36 for under 450 US$, check it out at www.acerperipherals.com/imaging/scanwit.html), but, naturally, I'm a bit sceptical. If anyone can give me info on this scanner I would aprecieate it.

-- (jhb01@comp.uark.edu), January 18, 2000

Answers

Check out comparison images at www.hamrick.com.

-- jonathan ratzlaff (jonathanr@clrtech.bc.ca), January 18, 2000.

First off, I must thank Jonathan for pointing out Ed Hamrick's comparison scans. The relevant page is:

http://www.hamrick.com/q60.html

This is the nearest I've seen to a review of the Acer ScanWit. I bought one a couple of months ago, and have been very pleased with the results that can be achieved with it, so I was very interested to see these comparisons. Looking at the "straight" scans of the Q60 slide immediately shows that the Acer's gamma is set quite a bit differently from nearly all the others, and there is a slight green bias to it. These "faults" are easily correctible, and once it has been normalised, it stands up very well to both the Canon and Nikon scans. In fact in terms of colour purity, it beats both of them! The yellow, cyan and green scales especially, are much purer than from ANY of the other scanners. Sharpness appears to be up there with the best as well. I can vouch for scans from negative film being excellent, perhaps better than its slide performance. The claimed scan speed of 40 seconds CAN be achieved, IF you've got a 400Mhz or better CPU and 256 megs of memory or more.

Two small niggles: This scanner needs to be fitted with a SCSI terminator to get reliable results from it if it's the only external SCSI device being used. Acer only mention this in passing, hidden away in the instruction booklet, and do not supply one with the scanner. So if you're tempted by this bargain price scanner, budget another $25 or so for a 25pin SCSI terminator. Also, the slide holder is not the best design in the world, some mounted slides are a very tight fit and tend to bow in the holder, giving uneven focus.

In the end, I suppose, you've got to ask if you can live with slightly quirky gamma for the sake of a substantial saving in outlay.

Thanks again Jonathan and Ed, regards,

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), January 19, 2000.