<?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: CanonScan 400 (how mach) faster than CanonScan LiDe 220? in Scanners</title>
    <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Scanners/CanonScan-400-how-mach-faster-than-CanonScan-LiDe-220/m-p/509369#M2690</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi pstein,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Canon has not published the speed of the LiDE 220.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;There are various web sites that test scanners and provide their results.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;One such web site stated that the LiDE 220 had a 10 second scan at 300 dpi and the LiDE 400 had an 8 second scan at 300 dpi.&amp;nbsp; I'm not sure what they were scanning.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Both scanners are almost identical.&amp;nbsp; They have the exact same dimensions and both have a 4800 x 4800 dpi contact image sensor.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The main difference between the two is that the LiDE 220 uses a USB Mini-B connection whereas the LiDE 400 uses the faster USB-C connection.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Did this answer your question? If so, please click the &lt;STRONG&gt;Accept as Solution&lt;/STRONG&gt; button below so that others may find the answer as well.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:20:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-10-29T20:20:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>CanonScan 400 (how mach) faster than CanonScan LiDe 220?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Scanners/CanonScan-400-how-mach-faster-than-CanonScan-LiDe-220/m-p/508598#M2681</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am thinking about buying a CanonScan Lide 400 flat bed scanner.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is it (and how much) faster than my old CanonScan lide 220 for lets say a 150dpi scan?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I miss a side-by-side comparison table with scan time values.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Peter&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 26 Oct 2024 14:23:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Scanners/CanonScan-400-how-mach-faster-than-CanonScan-LiDe-220/m-p/508598#M2681</guid>
      <dc:creator>pstein</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-10-26T14:23:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CanonScan 400 (how mach) faster than CanonScan LiDe 220?</title>
      <link>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Scanners/CanonScan-400-how-mach-faster-than-CanonScan-LiDe-220/m-p/509369#M2690</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi pstein,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Canon has not published the speed of the LiDE 220.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;There are various web sites that test scanners and provide their results.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;One such web site stated that the LiDE 220 had a 10 second scan at 300 dpi and the LiDE 400 had an 8 second scan at 300 dpi.&amp;nbsp; I'm not sure what they were scanning.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Both scanners are almost identical.&amp;nbsp; They have the exact same dimensions and both have a 4800 x 4800 dpi contact image sensor.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The main difference between the two is that the LiDE 220 uses a USB Mini-B connection whereas the LiDE 400 uses the faster USB-C connection.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Did this answer your question? If so, please click the &lt;STRONG&gt;Accept as Solution&lt;/STRONG&gt; button below so that others may find the answer as well.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:20:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/Scanners/CanonScan-400-how-mach-faster-than-CanonScan-LiDe-220/m-p/509369#M2690</guid>
      <dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-10-29T20:20:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

