<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: scanner quality on  &amp;quot;all-in-one&amp;quot; printer compared stand-alone scanner? in Desktop Inkjet Printers</title>
    <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Desktop-Inkjet-Printers/scanner-quality-on-quot-all-in-one-quot-printer-compared-stand/m-p/16963#M1698</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi cblair,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From a side by side comparison there should not be any difference, because essentially what we do is take one of our existing standalone scanners and add them to our multifunctions.&amp;nbsp; For example, the same scanning element that is used for the CanoScan 9000F is what makes up the scanner in the PIXMA MG8220.&amp;nbsp; That being the case, I would only base your decision on what scanning features you need in a multifunction model.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:34:59 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Karl1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-03-11T04:34:59Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>scanner quality on  "all-in-one" printer compared stand-alone scanner?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Desktop-Inkjet-Printers/scanner-quality-on-quot-all-in-one-quot-printer-compared-stand/m-p/16283#M1697</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I need to buy a new printer for my home office. &amp;nbsp;From a space stand point, the "all-in-one"printers are appealing, however I still need a good quality scanner. &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How does the quality of an "all-in-one" printer/scanner compare to a stand-alone scanner?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2013 02:25:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Desktop-Inkjet-Printers/scanner-quality-on-quot-all-in-one-quot-printer-compared-stand/m-p/16283#M1697</guid>
      <dc:creator>cblair</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-03-04T02:25:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: scanner quality on  "all-in-one" printer compared stand-alone scanner?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Desktop-Inkjet-Printers/scanner-quality-on-quot-all-in-one-quot-printer-compared-stand/m-p/16963#M1698</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi cblair,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From a side by side comparison there should not be any difference, because essentially what we do is take one of our existing standalone scanners and add them to our multifunctions.&amp;nbsp; For example, the same scanning element that is used for the CanoScan 9000F is what makes up the scanner in the PIXMA MG8220.&amp;nbsp; That being the case, I would only base your decision on what scanning features you need in a multifunction model.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:34:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Desktop-Inkjet-Printers/scanner-quality-on-quot-all-in-one-quot-printer-compared-stand/m-p/16963#M1698</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karl1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-03-11T04:34:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

