Agfa 1212u Comments/Mini-Review
David K. Shah
as a lot of people here in trying to find a decent scanner, I thought I'd
share some comments and my experience after a few days of use.
1) Installation. On Win98 upgrade - not smooth, but not as bad as some who
have posted here. USB PnP worked just fine, but Win98's Add New Hardware
wouldn't accept the .INF file for the scanner off the CD-ROM (got a message
like "Specified location does not contain information about your hardware"
or something like that). When I copied the file to the Windows INF
directory, it worked fine. Install of both FotoLook and FotoSnap was fine.
The Agfa doesn't like Win95 OSR2.x at all. For iMac users, there's an
updated CD-ROM in the box.
2) Speed. Fast. PC World's review in the April 1999 issue (more on that
later) ranks the Agfa as the fastest USB scanner they tested. I have used a
Microtek E3 SCSI (30-bit, 300x600dpi) fairly extensively and, although I
haven't tested this scientifically since I don't have the Microtek with me,
the Agfa "feels" like it's in the same ballpark, speed-wise, as the
Microtek. Not bad, since the Agfa is USB and is scanning 36 bits vs. 30.
3) Sleep function. It has one, but it doesn't quite work like it should.
There's a sleep button on the scanner, which deactivates the scanner and
turns the scanner's lamp off. Ideally, the scanner should go to sleep by
itself after some period of time, but it doesn't. Not too big a deal, but
it matters to some. It does go to sleep when my PC goes into Standby mode,
and it does wake up automatically when called by the TWAIN apps. It doesn't
bother me that much, since the Microtek E3 keeps the lamp on all the time -
at least I *can* turn the Agfa's lamp off.
3) Quality. Excellent. Actually I've been rather puzzled by many/most of
the magazine reviews of this scanner. Most reviews (PC World, CNet)
basically rank the Agfa's scan quality as somewhere between average and
washed out to flat out in the toilet. I did a test scan with the back cover
of the Unreal CD pamphlet (I would have attached the JPEG to this message,
but I don't think you can post binaries here and - horrors - I don't have a
web page). It's a pretty good test image because there are *lots* of colors
and gradients (it's not a good test of skin tones, though). The first scan
at default settings *was* terrible - a really bad moiré pattern showed up.
I thought this was kind of curious because I've never had a moiré pattern
appear when I scanned all types of materials with the Microtek (in general,
though, it's not unusual to have a moiré pattern appear when scanning
printed graphics). When I descreened it on the second scan with the
instructions in the help file, the result was awfully good. On the third
test scan, I adjusted the sharpness slightly (20%), and the final result was
excellent - in fact, I held the pamphlet up to the screen to compare, and
the scan was almost an exact match to the printed pamphlet. I suspect that
the reviewers do their scans at default settings. While that may be
reasonable for newbies or someone who uses a scanner very occasionally, I
don't think there should be that high a penalty if the TWAIN
driver/application can correct the scan with reasonably little effort. I
think the penalty should apply if the TWAIN app *can't* do it and the user
needs to fire up PhotoShop or something similar to correct the photo. By
the way, the Unreal pamphlet scan (4.69" x 4.69" 24-bit color) took 38
seconds with descreening, from the time I clicked the "Scan" button to the
time it appeared in PhotoImpact.
4) Software. I tried FotoSnap. Once. My advise - don't bother with it,
just learn to use FotoLook. I was really in the market for a Microtek USB
scanner, since I am very familiar with their ScanWizard TWAIN software.
FotoLook has comparable power, and is not terribly difficult to learn if you
experiment with it. And, at the risk of repeating myself, the results are
excellent. Haven't had any problems with FotoLook. (Maybe I should knock
on wood). The scanner comes with iPhoto Express (a basic, decent beginner's
graphics package, sort of a cross between a photo editor and Print
Shop/PrintMaster) and OmniPage LE. I had OmniPage installed from my
Microtek, but I haven't had a chance to try OCR with the Agfa.
5) Value. Considering its speed and quality, the Agfa 1212u is a pretty
good deal. They're available at Costco for $109.99 before a $30.00 rebate.
The rebate form in my box says the rebate ends on March 31, but I believe
it's been extended to June. Maybe Agfa realizes that no one has the
scanners in stock. Also, there's a version of the scanner with an iMac blue
case, but the rebate only applies to the ivory colored case.
If you're interested, send me an e-mail request (remove the ".removethis"
from the e-mail address), and I'll e-mail you a copy of the Unreal JPEG scan
(modified with a copyright message, of course). It's about 17K.
Good luck,
David Shah
dks...@usa.net.removethis
David K. Shah
Bermuda
info on the Agfa 1212U scanner. This mini-review does a nice job of filling
in some blanks. Also, David if you don't mind, please e-mail me a copy of
the Unreal JPEG scan.
Agfa still lists the 31st of March as the deadline for their rebate. If
anyone has more up-to-date info on this, please advise.
Thanks to all, for the Agfa information.
Ken
--
If by e-mail, reply to: mxsd30a(AT)prodigy(DOT)com
mikel
for a budget flatbed. I'd like USB.
I was curious why you ended up getting the Agfa over the Microtek you
siad you were in the market for...
Right now the microtek x6 and acer 620 comprise my short list.
Thanks,
Mikel
tlh
1. In different reviews I read horrible things about the image quality
of the Acer 620. Initially, this was my favorite one, because it
sells in SCSI version, includes a SCSI adapter, and seems
to be very fast. Does anyone have experience with the image quality
of the Acer 620?
2. In many postings to this group I also read horrible things about
the Microtek X6. This time, it doesn't seem to be the image
quality (which is pretty good - see April review of scanners
by PC World), but the handling of the software (and installation)
and the awful customer service they have. On the
positive side, the X6 is fast, available in SCSI version (w/o
adapter though), and comes with a transparency adapter to
scan dia slides and negatives (even though most of the people
say that it doesn't work?). I'm also in the game for the
Microtek EL6 model, which more or less seems to be a larger
version of the X6 which scans up to 8.5*14. I did not find any
review on this thing though.
After I read mikel's mini-review (thanks for the nice work, mikel!),
I added the Agfa 1212u to my list. I would appreciate any
additional help to make the decision easier. Thanks.
tlh
David K. Shah
Thanks for the feedback. I almost bought the Microtek X6 because there was
a $20 rebate that ended 02/28/99, so I figured that at $140 (including
shipping) minus the rebate it would be a pretty good deal. The only problem
(a big one) was that I couldn't find it anywhere in stock at a reasonable
price (less than $130) and, since the rebate deadline was looming, I wasn't
going to risk the $20. I stumbled across the Agfa at Costco by accident,
but they didn't have the rebate advertised so I figured that at $110 vs
$130, I'd get the Microtek. The formula changed a bit when I found out
about Agfa's rebate. It came to $87 for the Agfa ($109.99 + tax - rebate)
vs $140 (X6 + shipping) for the Microtek, since by this time the Microtek
rebate was over. I'd almost bought an Agfa two years ago, so I figured,
what the heck? It turned out to be a very good deal. Objectively speaking,
the Microtek would have been an easier purchase for me since I'm already
familiar with the Microtek ScanWizard interface, and even now I'm still more
familiar with ScanWizard than FotoLook. I haven't seen an X6's scans, but
having seen the Agfa scans, I don't think they would be significantly
better - at least not $53 better :>). The X6 does have some advantages such
as the availability of accessories like the transparency adapter and I
believe a document feeder. The Agfa doesn't support them, since Agfa
redesigned the 1212u case and it can't use standard Agfa accessories.
In short, from my experience with Microtek I don't think you'd go wrong
getting the X6, but for me the price difference (primarily) and the fact
that I don't need the Microtek accessories made the Agfa a much better deal.
Good luck,
David
mikel <mi...@REMOVETHIScityusa.net> wrote in message
news:36fadf3b...@news.cityusa.net...
David K. Shah
1) I haven't had any experience with the Acer, so I couldn't tell you.
2) In terms of Microtek support and installation, I've heard some real
horror stories and heard of users that had no problems whatsoever. A fairly
common complaint is that their tech support staff is, to put it nicely, of
limited help. However, one casualty of the scanner wars is true customer
support, and I believe that all consumer-level scanner companies' support
has suffered. Back when 300x600 flatbeds cost $300-500, which was really
not that long ago, support was noticeably better from my experience. I know
there was a huge debacle over the non-PnP Adapted ISA SCSI cards they used
to bundle. I was a bit puzzled by it because I installed it per Microtek's
instructions and it worked just fine. Then again, I've dealt with SCSI for
a long time. To be fair to Microtek, a lot of problems were/are related to
parallel port scanners sharing ports with printers and/or Zip drives.
Parallel port scanners on shared ports are just a real bad idea. If they're
on their own port, they're usually just fine. In other words, if you're
getting a parallel port scanner from *anybody*, spend the $8-10 on an EPP
ISA card if you have a spare slot and don't share the port with *anything*.
Microtek also does a pretty good job of updating the ScanWizard TWAIN
driver/app fairly frequently.
The X6 seems to be a pretty good scanner. I was going to buy one before the
Agfa (see the initial review and one of my follow up posts in this thread
for details). I don't think you'd go wrong with the USB or SCSI versions,
or with the parallel port version on its own port.
FYI - There's also a new Microtek that's basically the X6EL with both SCSI
and USB ports that sells for about the same price as the X6EL. I doubt that
you'll see separate reviews for the X6EL, since it seems to have the same
scan quality as the X6 but has the larger bed to do legal size scans.
If you'd like the Agfa/Unreal test scan, let me know.
Good luck shopping,
David
mikel
mini review.. I had just responded to it as you are.. you just
accidentaly attributed it to me. ;-)
However, I was curious about your comment that you had read several
reviews on the acer 620 having bad scans... may I ask which reviews.
Also, I note that you mention the April review in one of the
magazines. Read the comment there carefully about the 620.. it says
it has the worst scans in the top ten.
Also, I have to wonder about those reviews.. so often they are just
crap.
-Mikel
p.s. PSU <- is that Portland State in Oregon? I was looking
into that school a year or two ago. How do you like it?
On Fri, 26 Mar 1999 09:11:17 -0500, tlh <t...@kirkof.psu.edu> wrote:
>Here's another undecided reader with a list of scanners:
>
>1. In different reviews I read horrible things about the image quality
> of the Acer 620. Initially, this was my favorite one, because it
> sells in SCSI version, includes a SCSI adapter, and seems
> to be very fast. Does anyone have experience with the image quality
> of the Acer 620?
>
<snip>
Chad
I have the AGFA 1212U, excellent, fast, excellent quality!
Sergio(chile)
SUCKS!....well, to be fair, I can't really say that, due to the fact it
DIDN´t work at all (althoug other usb devices do).
I sell computers, mostly to friends and classmates (so it's not a buisness).
I recommended my friend that scanner, because it was Agfa, AND USB, and know
I'm having lot's of trouble, from agfa support, to get any help.
On the other hand, I have a Microteck E6 SCSI, it came with adaptec card (a
very basic card, though) and have been running for couple of years non stop.
I mean non stop (My sis use it everyday, I us it twice a day). So, go for a
microtek. I don't really think you'll ever need support.
...that's just my opinion. Good luck.
David K. Shah
Actually, I didn't see your previous post since for some reason it wasn't on
my news server. I looked it up on Deja News. A couple of questions:
1) Which Agfa TWAIN drivers/applications did you install?
2) Which software package(s) are using to scan?
3) What are the versions numbers on FotoLook and/or FotoSnap?
I would also be the first to say that the Agfa isn't perfect. If you scan
the newsgroup, you'll find people like Chad and me who have an excellent,
working scanner and others who have had all sorts of problems. You can say
that about lots of peripherals. I'd also reiterate the points I made in an
earlier post about support - I haven't had to use Agfa's support in the
brief time I've had the scanner, but from what I've read it seems the
support is rather uneven. However, I'd have to say the same about Microtek.
My Microtek's been working just fine for a couple of years as well, but I
think I'd cringe if I had to use Microtek's support line.
Sergio(chile) <kek...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:36fba9ee.0@omega...
Sergio(chile)
you are a wise man, and you are right. But it was just an opinion, based on
my experience; I know other people have had worst support from Microtek than
the one given by Agfa.
I installed both FotoLook and FotoScan, together, and independently, and
it never worked.
To scan, I tried Ulead's PhotoImpact, the other ulead software that came
with the scanner (I don't recall the name right now), Corel, Word, and none
of them worked, 'cause the twain didn't.
And the version is the one from December 98 (I think it was 3.008) The
CD that came with the users manual, and installation guide was from October
98, and I found a CD in an envelope, lonely and forgotten inside the card
box (later version). None worked either.
The message it displayed was as follows (It's in Spanish, but the English
version was the same):
"Asegúrese de que ha instalado los controladores necesarios para su tarjeta
SCSI. [make sure you installed all drivers needed for your SCSI
adapter(??????). Check all the cables and conexions, and turn the scanner
on. Also check that only one SCSI ID is assigned per SCSI device.]
Instalación del controlador ASPI de 32 bits
Controlador instalado satisfactoriamente.....this was OK
Instalación del controlador STI
Controlador instalado satisfactoriamente.....this was OK
No se ha podido encontrar un escáner Agfa en el adaptador principal 0 (STI)
SCSI ID 00 - DISCO (It says it couldn't fin an Agfa scanner on main adapter
0 (STI))
Instalación del controlador ASPI de 32 bits
Controlador instalado satisfactoriamente...OK too
No se ha podido encontrar un escáner Agfa en el adaptador principal 0
(ESDI_506)
(Could not find scanner on main adapter 0 (ESDI_506)
Instalación del controlador EPP2
Ha fallado la inicialización del SCNDRVxx.DLL. (Initialization of
SCNDRVxx.DLL failed.)"
Thanks for your time
Chad
Perhaps your computer can't handle USB,,,,,,,,,,Everyone who has a good
computer usually can get the awesome 1212U to work!
Chad
Do you have win 98 installed?
Al Kaufmann
never had any problem with the 1212u only the Fotolook software that
came with it and AGFA is replacing that. I wonder how much they'll
charge for that upgrade.
Ak
David K. Shah
It looks like there's a problem with USB either on your computer or the
scanner. The SCSI errors, though kind of odd, are normal, since a lot of
non-SCSI stuff (like certain IDE devices) gets mapped as SCSI and use ASPI
services. The Agfa uses Win98's STI interface. If I'm in FotoLook and I
select the "Rescan SCSI Bus" option in the Utilities menu (something that
sounds like it shouldn't work), it finds the USB scanner. From the messages
you received, the TWAIN software started searching for the scanner with the
ASPI/STI interface, as it should. So I don't think the problem is with the
TWAIN software, it's just that the TWAIN app can't find the scanner on the
STI interface. FYI, it looks like you were using the same software version
I am, FotoLook 3.00.08.
First possibility is that you simply got a bad scanner. Have you tried a
replacement 1212u to see if it happens with a second scanner?
Second, we're back to the USB interface. There's a possibility - I admit I
don't know for sure - that they may be a mismatch between USB specs, i.e.
the scanner is USB 1.1 and the system board is USB 1.0. I know of other
users who have had problems with other USB products when used on older
system boards (circa 1997, even early 1998) with Win98. I'm beginning to
wonder about this, because a fair number of people seem to be having this
problem. Anyway, a few more questions:
1) What kind of computer/system board do you have?
2) Are you using any hubs between the system board and the scanner?
3) Did the scanner show up properly in Device Manager, i.e. under which
device category?
4) Did you try removing the scanner from the Device Manager and reinstalling
the drivers?
Maybe we can track this down, since a lot of people seem to be having this
problem.
Good luck,
David
Sergio(chile) <kek...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:36fbd2c4.0@omega...
Chad
Whats being replaced?
Dave
Great review, makes me feel good about having bought the 1212u at Costco as
well. I do have a problem that the AGFA tech support hasn't been much help
with. It seems that when my scanner goes into sleep mode (and it does it on
it's own) all my USB peripherals quit working! The problem can be repeated
by hitting the snooze button on the scanner - really bizarre. Got the
latest BIOS for my mobo (Super 7 FIC PA2013 - AMD K62-400), and what I
believe is the latest drivers for the scanner.
Before heading into sleep land, the scanner works great and I am really
pleased with it. Just thought I'd mention the problem I'm having on the off
chance someone has some ideas.
Again, thanks for the review, very helpful and encouraging.
Dave Hankins
David K. Shah
Thanks for the comments. Re your problem with USB on your FIC system
board - have you gotten the very latest VIA USB Filter Driver? It seems
like I came across a message somewhere that a user having a problem with an
FIC system board and an Agfa 1212u that sporadically disappeared from the
USB chain fixed the problem by installing the latest (I believe December
1998) USB Filter Driver from VIA. Try http://www.via.com.tw/drivers .
Good luck,
David
Dave <ojai...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hYTL2.98$Ui....@monger.newsread.com...
Nicolas Bello
company sent me a new one right away. That one didn't work either so they
sent me another one. Now I was getting suspicious so I reformatted my HDD
and reinstalled Win98. Now the second scanner (I hadn't sent it back yet)
worked perfectly. Needless to say that the third one worked fine too. I
have nothing but praise for the way Agfa handled my situation. Never once
did they make me feel that my hardware might be at fault. The bonus is that
the reformat gave me a much faster overall system.
Nick
Visit my Las Vegas trip report at http://www3.sympatico.ca/nbello/
David K. Shah
Agfa's hardware support seems to be very good. A couple of users have noted
that Agfa quickly replaces scanners that are defective or thought to be
defective. Their software support seems to catch a lot of complaints.
Their software/driver upgrade policies in the past haven't been particularly
great, e.g. sometimes you had to pay for the latest version of the TWAIN
driver/app. That ticked a lot of people off. It also seems that the
software support techs don't handle well what are probably hardware problems
that get manifested as TWAIN/software errors, particularly with the USB
scanners.
<Rant>As for Win98, I won't even start with how Microsoft could have had
such a poor product as the Win98 upgrade, particularly since it seems like
virtually everyone on the planet either officially beta tested it or had an
illegal version of it. I upgraded from Win 3.1 to Win95 back in August
1995. I reinstalled it only once, when my hard drive crashed. I upgraded
from Win95 to Win98 in July 1998. Calling it an upgrade is being generous.
After what appeared to be a successful upgrade, things got real flaky real
fast. Then I noticed that Win98 did not replace a fair number of Win95
default drivers. Between July 1998 and October 1998, I reinstalled it at
least seven times. My hard drive died in October, and I did a fresh
reinstall of Win98. That fixed the problems, although it took me about a
week to reinstall all of my apps.</rant>
Anyway, the point of that was that a number of people who were running Win95
OSR2.x with USB support and upgraded to Win98 apparently found that their
USB support was *not* upgraded, and the old substandard Win95 USB support
was being used under Win98. A full reinstall of Win98 usually fixed the
problem. I suspect that's why some USB product tech support departments
state that USB only works with the full Win98 retail product, not the
upgrade.
Happy scanning,
David
Nicolas Bello <nbe...@netcom.ca> wrote in message
news:EYVL2.15030$R92....@news20.bellglobal.com...
toa...@my-dejanews.com
the Agfa 1212 U, nor the HP 4100, but USB, would communicate with my
computer. HP gave me a little insight as to why. My Aptiva has an Open Host
USB, while the HP 4100 requires a Universal Host USB. Looks like not all
USBs are alike. Has anyone had any success with USB scanners for the IBM
Aptiva E3U or similar (non intel chip processors)? I refuse to keep buying
every USB scanner on the market, taking the time to try and install it, and
then return it.
Thanks,
Stephanie
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
David K. Shah
All USBs are definitely *not* alike, because of differences in the USB spec
versions, chipset support of USB and operating system support. If you have
an Open Host USB then you probably have an SiS chipset on your system board.
The ideal USB platform currently is an Intel 440BX/GX-based system running
Win98. What operating system are you running? Win95 or Win98?
David
<toa...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7eb92g$ds7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
toa...@my-dejanews.com
"David K. Shah" <dks...@usa.net.removethis> wrote:
>
> All USBs are definitely *not* alike, because of differences in the USB spec
> versions, chipset support of USB and operating system support. If you have
> an Open Host USB then you probably have an SiS chipset on your system board.
> The ideal USB platform currently is an Intel 440BX/GX-based system running
> Win98. What operating system are you running? Win95 or Win98?
>
> David
>
I'm running on Windows '98. Do you have any ideas? Last night I went out and
bought ANOTHER scanner, the Acer 620 U. I talked to their tech support, and
they said I should have no problem with Win 98 and Open Host. If this
doesn't work, I give up! (unless I get some good ideas!)
David K. Shah
If you're running Win98, there's not much more that can be done - you're
pretty much at the mercy of your system board's USB support. A couple of
other things:
1) Is an IRQ enabled/assigned to USB in the BIOS?
2) Have you tried any other USB peripherals to see if they work?
The only other possible Win98-related issue I can think of occurs sometimes
when you upgrade from Win95 OSR2.x (the version of Win95 with USB support)
to Win98. Seems that sometimes Win98 doesn't overwrite the old USB files
and you end up with flaky USB under Win98. I had a rant about this earlier
in this thread, but basically the only way to fix the mess was a clean
install of Win98. I know a couple of users have the Agfa working on the VIA
chipset, but I haven't heard of anyone using the Agfa on a SiS chipset-based
system board. Hopefully the Acer will work for you.
Post here and let us know what happens.
David