Canon Ratings and Reviews
Reviews Home / Consumer & Home Office Reviews / Scanners Reviews / CanoScan Series Reviews
Shop Now At Canon
Shop CanoScan Series or
Choose a Category

Customer Reviews for CanoScan 9000F Mark II

CanoScan 9000F Mark II

Enjoy high-speed scanning for everything from photos to documents, to even 35mm film while also enjoying superb quality.
Average Customer Rating:
4.1 out of 5
4.1
 out of 
5
(10 Reviews) 10
Open Ratings Snapshot
Rating Snapshot (10 reviews)
5 stars
5
4 stars
2
3 stars
2
2 stars
1
1 star
0
8 out of 10(80%)reviewers would recommend this product to a friend.
Customer Reviews for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Review 1 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: AlW
Location: Los Altos, CA
Used this product for: 6 to 12 months
Expertise Level: Hobbyist/Enthusiast
Canon Enthusiast: 6 to 10 years
Product replacement: Yes

Two Things I Don't Like

Overall Rating
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Features
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Performance
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Date:March 13, 2014
I have been using the Canon 9000F MKII for six months to scan color slides that are very sharp. Typical scans are at 1800 or 2400 dpi. My major concern is the scan is never sharp. There had been a previous complaint about sharpness and for that user, the problem was resolved by changing out the scanner. I don't know if my problem is hardware or software. I always have to adjust the sharpness and only occasionally anything else. However, making this adjustment increases the file size from typically 700k to 2500k or more.
My second concern is that after the initial scan, the file is in a jpg format which is lossy. Why couldn't it be in a loss less format (jif or png) until the final tweeks are made? Scan Gear provides only the one format , jpg.
I'll struggle along but will always have a nagging feeling that something is wrong. IIs there a firmware adjustment that can be made?
25 of 29 people found this review helpful.
Review 2 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: Patman
Location: St. Louis Region, Missouri
Used this product for: more than 1 year
Expertise Level: Advanced Amateur
Canon Enthusiast: 1 to 5 years
Product replacement: No

One Year Review

Overall Rating
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Features
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Performance
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Date:February 7, 2014
Pros: excellent images.
Cons: none found as yet.
I have been using my 9000F Mark II for a year now.
I have scanned documents and photographs with
it and am quite satisfied with the performance of
the equipment. Software package is also satisfactory.
6 of 6 people found this review helpful.
Review 3 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: Songcyclist
Location: Lancaster PA
Used this product for: Less than 1 month
Expertise Level: Hobbyist/Enthusiast
Canon Enthusiast: more than 20 years
Product replacement: No

In Scanning Heaven!

Overall Rating
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Features
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Performance
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Date:February 5, 2014
This is my second scanner (I returned the first one immediately after scanning 2 slides - disaster!) I LOVE this scanner. I have thousands of family slides and some very old family photos that I want to archive as part of a genealogy project. After some initial struggling with when to scan with/without the FARE feature, I've got it down to a system and am getting fantastic results. Love the ability to adjust contrast, color, brightness, crop etc. I agree with the person who commented about naming the images - that's the only part I find difficult. I decided to copy them into folders on my PC desktop and am naming/dating them there so they stay in chronological order by topics. Tedious, but worth it in the end. One other thing that really helps is to use a light table to preview slides before scanning - discard the ones that aren't good and put them in the order you want to scan and save them. I just ordered an external monitor to use with my laptop so I have two workspaces, and also to see the images better for making adjustments. I highly recommend this for scanning slides - and the bonus I didn't even think about is being able to scan documents as well. Great product!
8 of 8 people found this review helpful.
Review 4 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: Denny J
Location: Austintown, Ohio
Used this product for: Less than 1 month
Expertise Level: Advanced Amateur
Canon Enthusiast: 1 to 5 years
Product replacement: Yes

Way better than my last scanner

Overall Rating
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Features
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Performance
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Date:January 7, 2014
Pros: Compact Design, durable, Fast Connectivity, High resolution, High-speed scanning, easy to use, productivity
I used to own three other scanners by another company and this scanner is by far the best of all. In fact I used to used this other companies products exclusively but when I tried to get product support they wouldn't help me. I now have Canon printers and scanner and found that they are the more superior product.in every facet of the game. This scanner takes about 1/10th the time to scan a document or image and with the use of the image garden makes scanning a joy. I now use Canon products exclusively. Everything about the scanner and printers makes using a computer much more exciting and fun. Thank you Canon.
13 of 14 people found this review helpful.
Review 5 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: Maysie
Location: Toronto, Canada
Used this product for: more than 1 year
Expertise Level: Casual User
Canon Enthusiast: 6 to 10 years
Product replacement: Yes

Should also have hoders to scan 126 negatives and

Overall Rating
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Features
1 out of 5
1 out of 5
Performance
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Price/Value
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Quality
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Satisfaction
1 out of 5
1 out of 5
Date:December 10, 2013
There was a lot of 126 and 110 film sold in the past that I would like to scan. I like the resolution of this scanner but I can't scan my files of 126 and 110 negatives as there is no provision for it in the hardware or the software. Get with it Canon.
19 of 22 people found this review helpful.
Review 6 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: onetoedsloth
Location: Austin, tx
Used this product for: 1 to 3 months
Expertise Level: Advanced Amateur
Canon Enthusiast: 1 to 5 years
Product replacement: Yes

Why cant I name my files

Overall Rating
2 out of 5
2 out of 5
Features
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Performance
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
3 out of 5
3 out of 5
Satisfaction
1 out of 5
1 out of 5
Date:November 9, 2013
Pros: Fast Connectivity, High resolution
Cons: Slow Connectivity, Difficult to use, Slow-speed scanning
The scanner produces good images however there is no way to label each set prior to scanning i.e puppies001-1000 so after scanning I have to reopen the an name each one. so cumbersome!
18 of 27 people found this review helpful.
Review 7 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: Iceman
Location: Minneapolis-St Paul, MN
Used this product for: 3 to 6 months
Expertise Level: Advanced Amateur
Canon Enthusiast: 6 to 10 years
Product replacement: Yes

Great value, more than satisfied

Overall Rating
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Features
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Performance
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Date:June 1, 2013
Pros: High resolution, easy to use
I purchased this to scan old family slide and negatives. After over 2,000 scans and post processing, I would say it is the best money I have spent on such technology in the past year. As with any new piece of hardware and software it takes a bit of trial and error to get the end product one desires. In my case this was about 3 to 4 hours. I ended up using the ScanGear settings for all of the negatives and slides. The fade correction and backlit correction produced awesome results, better than expected. Takes 20-25 minutes to scan a fully loaded 35mm tray with color negatives. I could not find a way to use the flexibility of ScanGear with documents or hardcopy photos, the only reason I would not give it 5 stars. Great piece of technology!
40 of 40 people found this review helpful.
Review 8 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: BeVisual
Location: Harpers Ferry, WV
Used this product for: Less than 1 month
Expertise Level: Professional or Expert
Canon Enthusiast: more than 20 years
Product replacement: Yes

Canon 9000F Mark II Scanner

Overall Rating
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Features
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Performance
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Date:March 22, 2013
Pros: Fast Connectivity, High resolution, High-speed scanning, easy to use, color quality, color accuracy
As any real photographer knows when it comes to equipment, the proof is in the photograph. That being said, the following is a photographer oriented review in that image quality is valued first and foremost.
I picked up my 9000 F Mark II two days ago and since then I have run a number of real-world tests on it. Unfortunately, I could not compare it to the original 9000 F since I don't have one available, however, my 9000 F Mark II seems to perform better based on the early reviews of the original 9000 F. I'll speak to that momentarily, but keep in mind that I cannot really account for the validity of anyone else's results. So in fact, there may be indeed be no difference in image quality between recent manufacturers of the two models.
This is a summary of what I did found on the Mark II:
Regarding Platen use with flat documents and photographs, I found the scanner to be very fast, and it produced excellent quality in terms of color accuracy and neutrality. In fact, after profiling it with two different IT8 targets using third-party software I found that all this resulted in was a loss of color neutrality and an exaggeration of contrast, which I really didn't care for on either count. In reality, the Canon ScanGear software produced the best results and was much easier to work with. At 300 dpi with 48 bit color it averaged around 9 seconds for an A4 size document and it produced a 51 MB Tiff file, which I found to be more than adequate for PDFs that were much better than than my MX870 or Lide600F. At 600 dpi it took 26 seconds to produce a 48 bit 102 MB Tiff file that would be better for larger reproductions. At 1200 dpi it took 1 min. and 44 seconds to produce a 409 MB 48 bit Tiff file that was, very critically speaking, sharper than the 600 dpi scan, however, you have to uncheck the thumbnail view in ScanGear to do this and you would never be able to tell the difference on an 8 x 10 anyway. So I'm going with 600 dpi as a standard for photographs, because frankly there's no good reason for more especially when you just start to see ink jet patterns and minute dust, aside from simple fact that a 102 MB file doesn't take a supercomputer linked to server farms for storage, unlike the 409 MB 1200 dpi files when things begin to add up.
Film Scanning
After a number of tests I found that 2400 dpi resulted in the sharpest scans, which may not seem to make sense at first but it was true nevertheless. Even with FARE Medium enabled it only took an average of 1 min. and 30 seconds on Kodachrome to produce a 40 MB 48 bit Tiff file. Increasing the resolution to 4800 dpi or 9600 dpi was a real loser on three fronts. First the sharpness got progressively worse at these "higher dpi settings", the times increased dramatically, as well as the file sizes, which reached an absurd 625 MB 48 bit Tiff, again with fare enabled. So 2400 dpi with FARE enabled (which did not effect the sharpness) was the winner! While again I couldn't compare the film performance with the 9000 F original I was able to compare it to my older dedicated film scanner the CanoScan FS4000US, which could only be used with third-party software and produced considerably more noise. In terms of resolution though the dedicated film scanner was better, although it wasn't very noticeable on 4 x 6 prints and took a good deal of advanced Photoshop techniques to fully utilize. So for smaller print reproductions, speed (1 min. 30 seconds compared to 8 min. 30 seconds on the old film scanner) and the color quality of the color negative scans I'll definitely use my 9000 F Mark II for archiving and cataloging and when I have one of those well-crafted images that I want to print large I'll simply rescan on the film scanner, which by the way is not supported on the newer operating systems unless you purchase third-party software that includes its own drivers.
In conclusion, I am really happy with the scanner at least partially because I didn't expect magical results on critically high quality film images. As I mentioned earlier, even though I could not compare it to the original 9000 F I did not find any problems whatsoever in terms of overall image quality and ease-of-use based on my real-world tests, in fact I found that the new ScanGear produced excellent color overall and particularly with regard to color negatives. This differs from what some earlier reviews of the original 9000 F claimed to be issues. Even for film scans I found that the quality was really not an issue unless you're going 8 x 10 or larger with a really good original.
Hope this helps.
171 of 177 people found this review helpful.
Review 9 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: WelshGap
Location: Siloam Springs, AR
Used this product for: Less than 1 month
Expertise Level: Advanced Amateur
Canon Enthusiast: more than 20 years
Product replacement: Yes

Good Product

Overall Rating
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Features
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Performance
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
4 out of 5
4 out of 5
Date:February 21, 2013
Pros: Fast Connectivity, High resolution, High-speed scanning, easy to use
Cons: software
I waited for this product for several months. It is good and it is fast. I really like this product so far. Got it to scan old color slide and old pictures.
I do not like the software. It has crashed on me a couple of times. It needs to show an indicator when it is working. It does not have any correction for out of focus. It is not intuitive.
I can not say how rugged or durable it is as I have not had it very long.
I would add a copy of a scanned color slide or two but they don't allow in these reviews. I think they would want to.
18 of 25 people found this review helpful.
Review 10 for CanoScan 9000F Mark II
Nickname: Dave
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Used this product for: more than 1 year
Expertise Level: Professional or Expert
Canon Enthusiast: 11 to 20 years
Product replacement: No

"A" rating for the CanoScan 9000F, varied uses....

Overall Rating
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Features
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Performance
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Price/Value
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Quality
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Satisfaction
5 out of 5
5 out of 5
Date:January 16, 2013
Pros: durable, Fast Connectivity, High resolution, High-speed scanning, easy to use, user has a range of control, price was reasonable., scanner had held up well for a few years now well
I am happy with the CanoScan 9000F, and I use the scanner to scan negatives, slides, photographs and documents, both for business and personal photography interest.
I have had very, very little issues with quality, regarding the ability to focus in, adjust or manipulate scans. I am happy with the functionality of the software regarding adjusting the scans and giving me options, not just variable DPI and photoshop software, but actually being able to adjust the quality of the scans.
I have used the scanner to scan very old black and white negatives, as well as fairly old color negatives, also both black and white slides have come out very nice, and of course pictures and documents are no trouble. Different trays come with it, and you either fit in your slides, negatives, pictures or documents, and the accessories easily fit to keep the slides, etc., in the right place, and easy to move on to the next set of scans.
I use an iMac, and really enjoy the one button push scans that I can quickly email, store in folders and do one of many things.
The bottom line, this scanner is very reasonable, which is a nice surprise. I have been able to save many many images that are 50 to 80 years old, and not hurt the media, all for a very low price. I have had the CanoScan for some time, and have had no problems with it what so ever. If your in the market looking around, and you are on a budget, buy this scanner!!
100 of 109 people found this review helpful.
©2014 Canon U.S.A., Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. View mobile site