I made the decision to purchase the Canon Lide 400 scanner based on the excellent experience I had using the Canon Lide 210 scanner. I really wanted to have a newer, more up-to-date product. The Lide 400 scanner is an excellent product, the images obtained have excellent quality. However, I have to tell you that I was about to return this scanner because they no longer incorporate the ScanGear function, which was one of the best features of the Lide 210 scanner. It is really unfortunate that Canon has not incorporated the scan gear in the new equipment. I reiterate that Canon brand products are excellent.

With all the hoopala you'd think Epson knew how to make one of these. Bought one, stopped working in 6 months and of course no service. Then replaced scanner with Cannon and no issues, no drama just works reliably well.

I needed a flatbed type portable scanner I could use with my laptop when away from home. This one seems to meet that need for me (I haven't traveled with it yet). Since I use Linux Mint, the Canon software wouldn't work (shame on you, Canon, for not making Linux compatible drivers!), so I can't comment on how well the scanner works with Canon's software. I already use Hamrick's VueScan software on my other two scanners, a Canon 9000F flatbed scanner, and a Fujitsu ix500 duplexing, ADF scanner (both of which are NOT what I would consider portable!) and it works well with this scanner once I updated it. I haven't tried to use any of the scanners buttons since Vuescan easily and conveniently does it all from within the software. When I first tried to use the scanner with Vuescan, I went nuts trying to get the software settings to work the way I needed. It then dawned on me that I hadn't updated VueScan in quite a while since "nothing was broke so don't fix it." After I updated Vuescan (although the .deb version would probably work, the tarball—.tgz—version, when extracted, had a simple to use installer that automagically updated the current installation without changing the settings), everything started working perfectly. Another reviewer reported getting good results with the free to use xsane. The first time I used it, I noticed that it was hard to slide paper over the platen. I lightly moistened a microfiber cloth with water and gently wiped down the platen. After that, paper easily slides across the platten. The stand for the scanner is a joke. Trying to position a document or whatever on the scanner while it is in the stand will be awkward at best. One will have to be really hard up for space to find it useful. I put mine in the drawer of items that will never see daylight again. Also, my Canon 9000F uses the upper right corner has "home" for locating documents on the platen. The LiDE 400 uses the lower left corner as "home". This will take a bit of getting used to. Now for the pros and cons. Pros: 1. Inexpensive 2. Compact for a flatbed scanner that can handle up to letter size documents. 3. Lightweight 4. Runs off USB power so no power cords needed. (Canon says USB 3.0 is necessary for this scanner but I was able to run it just fine off a USB 2.0 port on my laptop; your "mileage" may vary.) 5. When using VueScan and the settings have been sorted out, it's easy to use. 6. Good quality scans. 7. 48" long USB cable Cons: 1. Anything being scanned must fit flat on the platen to be fully in focus, unlike my Canon 9000F which can focus on parts that may be as much as 1/2" from its platen (for my intended use, that will not be a problem). 2. It's noisier than my other scanners (not a big deal for me). 3. The lid is flimsy. This will be a problem when transporting the scanner since the lid won't be able to protect the glass platen unless precautions are taken to protect them (I've ordered a larger laptop bag so I can safely carry the scanner in the same bag with my laptop). 4. The lock slide on the bottom is stiff to move. It has to be locked when transporting the scanner and unlocked when using it. Being on the bottom of the scanner, it will be easy to forget to reset it every time the scanner is transported and set up for use. 5. 48" long USB cable (whether that is a pro or con will vary from person to person). For me, the cons were not enough for me to remove any stars from the rating. It should perfectly meet my needs. I do a lot of scanning (including some hard to scan items) so I wouldn't want to use this as my go-to flatbed scanner at home, especially since my old 9000F is still going strong but, for occasional use, the LiDE 400 should last me a long time. BTW, the description is wrong; it's 1.75" x 9.875" x 14.5".

The LIDE 400 is the latest updated iteration of the LIDE Series. It is fast, sleek, compact, light weight, modern looking and highly functional. Connection is a snap direct from the Canon website: took about 5 minutes. Use is a breeze thanks to the Canon intuitive user interface with all the options one would need. A great value at a very fair price!

To be clear, this scanner, though purchased new, is several Canon generations old. I purchased for my elderly father so he could scan some pictures and documents he had had in boxes for decades, so I wanted something simple. This scanner fit the bill perfectly. It is a 'one touch' device that, once I set it up for him, allows my dad to push one of four buttons on the front to complete his scans. If you go into the settings, you can have the scans sent to a specific folder, which is what I set up for him. Scan quality is excellent for our purposes (mostly written documents) but I also scanned some photos just to check the quality and they were outstanding.

Canon CanoScan LiDe 400 Slim Scanner, sold by Canon. After almost 20 years of reliable performance, my trusty Microtek SlimScan C6 flatbed finally bit the dust. I seriously considered buying another C6 (new old stock) because it was so reliable, easy to use, and full of features. BUT, the C6 probably won't interface well with newer versions of Windows (i.e., anything later than XP), so I decided to look for something newer. For $ 90, the LiDe 400 seemed to fit both my budget and needs. Here's the PROs and CONs I have found: PROs: 1. Really inexpensive 2. Pretty simple to install on any Windows computer with Win 7 or higher. 3. Does a really decent job of scanning documents and photographs (see below). CONs: 1. Doesn't come with a manual (hardcopy or on the CD), and there doesn't seem to be a way to download a whole manual from the Canon LiDe Website (it's a pain in the ass to have to find the information you are looking for, piece by piece, on the Website... a downloaded complete manual would be so much easier). 2. The cable from the scanner to computer is relatively short (a little less than 5 feet). That's fine for hooking to my laptop that sits adjacent to the scanner, but doesn't work for my laptops or PC that are at more distant workstations. It would be really nice if Canon provided a cable that is 2 - 3 time longer, or at least provided cable specifications so you could buy an appropriate longer cable (it's apparently a "special" cable... you can't just use a run-of-the-mill extension). 3. You can't remove the scanner bed cover to facility scanning larger media. With my C6, you could take off the cover so you could scan large media like maps without having to fold (damage) the original. For me, this is the most serious downside to the LiDe 400, and is something Canon could have easily rectified with a different type of cover hinge. 4. Apparently doesn't work with earlier version of Windows. I'd really like to use the scanner with my old XP desktop, because I have lots of really good XP-based image processing software. The work-around appears to be to buy VueScan drivers from Hamrick. That will be one of my next tasks. As far as use, so far I have been reasonably satisfied with the Canon LiDe 400. I used the front buttons to scan pages and create a pdf document, and it was a really simple and intuitive process. The Auto Scan front button made a decent copy of a photograph, but you can get much better photo scanning results (including higher resolutions than what "Auto Scan" provides) using the Twain compliant ScanGear software that is included. ScanGear lets you do some limited image correction and post-processing. It's OK, but the ULead PhotoImpact software that came with my Microtek SlimScan C6 was FAR more versatile. In particular, ScanGear has very limited options for descreening when scanning printed images (like newspaper or magazine articles, or some types of laser printed originals). I'm really hoping that when I install the VueScan drivers on my XP machine, I can interface the LiDe 400 with the much better PhotoImpact image processing software that I already have. Overall... the Canon LiDe 400 scanner is a decent, inexpensive, basic-use flatbed scanner. For most people who just want to scan letter-size documents, or digitize a bunch of photographs with good resolution, this scanner will more than suffice. FINAL NOTE: Like most inexpensive flatbed scanners, you are limited to original documents that are no more than 8.5 x 12 inches in size. Supposedly, there is a way to scan larger originals in pieces, and then "stitch together" the pieces to create a full-size digital product. I haven't tried this feature, so I can't tell you if it really works as advertised or not. Original review: 15 June 2022. This review will be updated once the Hamrick VueScan drivers are installed, or if any problems with the scanner are subsequently found.

I love this scanner, but I'll start off talking about a certain aspect because I did see a lot of reviews saying you can't scan at 4800DPI or you are limited to a tiny image. After some trial and error, I found out you can do 4800 DPI. The limitation of the ScanGear software (included with the scanner) is apparently memory. But oh well. The image cannot exceed 50,000x50,000 pixels or 4GB. so that means the biggest image I was able to scan at 4800 DPI is 6.7 inches x 9.20 inches which is just below 4GB in size for a JPEG. I shouldn't have any limitations because my PC has 128 GB of RAM and 80 TB of storage but oh well. Note that this 6.7 inches x 9.2 inches is the output resolution. The input can be whatever can fit on the glass (example, 8.5 inches x 11 inches). In order to get to 4800 DPI, if you want to use the included Canon software, you have to use ScanGear. It doesn't appear to be available in Canon's other scanning modes. If you use a paid commercial scanning software like Vuescan, maybe this 4800 DPI memory limitation doesn't exist because the hardware can do 4800 DPI. Here's the key point, you have to go to the settings for ScanGear and select the checkbox for "Enable large image scans". I don't know why this is even an option. Whoever wrote the software should just allow for large image scans because it's only going to confuse people. If you don't set this checkbox, the biggest image you can scan is something like 14000x10000 pixels which means at 4800DPI, the biggest image is something like 2 inches x 2.5 inches. Once the setting is saved, go to ScanGear to scan the image. TYPE 4800 into the resolution box (don't use the dropdown arrow). Set max scan to 6.7"x9.2". That will produce a 4GB data file. If you're expecting to scan a 4800DPI 6.7"x9.2" TIFF image, you would probably need terabytes of RAM because it doesn't scan to your storage. It scans into your memory and then saves that image to disk. Considering a lot of users have only 8GB or 16GB of RAM, scanning a 4800DPI TIFF image isn't really feasible. Then you will be able to scan at 4800DPI. Remember, this 6.7"x9.2" is the output resolution. The input can be the full size of the scanner glass. For example, you put on a 8.5 inch x 11 inch paper. and then the output is 6.7"x9.2". And the last aspect of 4800 DPI scanning is how long it takes. This is not the seconds of scanning you get with 300 DPI or 600 DPI. No, this is many minutes. You really have to realize whether 4800 DPI is worth it to you. If you're scanning a printed photo, 4800 DPI won't really make it better. you're at the limit of the print. 4800 DPI aside, how is this scanner? It's super thin as a scanner. You can put books or whatever on the glass (platen). I thought about the Epson photo scanner where you can feed pictures. But then I realized it was $600 and that you can't scan books and non-fed sheets and it was limited to 600 DPI. This Canon is super fast at more normal resolutions (300, 600, 1200, etc.). It comes with a stand so you can have the scanner vertically positioned while scanning! Not sure how useful that is but it is neat to see it scanning something while vertical. The color reproduction and the scanner features are top-notch. I totally recommend this if you're scanning at 2400 DPI and below. I bought it mostly for photo scanning. For photos I plan to share through social media or email, I'll probably scan at 300 DPI or 600 DPI (that I then compress down) because email's limit is 25MB which is something like 7000x7000. I know the JPEGs I output out of photoshop from my digital camera are 45 megapixels (8192x5464 resolution) and 31.5MB in size so already too big for email or social media. If your main thing is scanning everything at 4800DPI, then I would suggest getting something else. For photos I'm going to print, I'll probably scan at 1200 or 2400 DPI. But if you'll only occasionally use 4800 DPI, then this can totally do it and do it well (as long as you're below 50000x50000 resolution). I just scanned a 32162x44160 which ended up being a 410 MB JPEG. It took about 20 minutes (ballpark estimate). Note that if 4800 DPI was seamless and was selectable from a dropdown menu, I would've given this scanner 5 stars. But for making it a hassle, I knocked off a star.

I purchased a Canon all in one printer because I needed a new scanner. The software was so bad I had to send the unit back twice. Scans were so light they were useless. Research showed this is a known issue with this brand, which used to be superior. It wasn’t the equipment, it was the software (long story there). So in looking for a scanner, this model kept rating as best affordable scanner among users, professional reviewers and artists scanning artwork. I was skeptical of Canon after the all in one experience, but I gave it a try. I installed the drivers from the disk onto Windows 10. Well, the disk has no drivers. It’s an installation wizard which goes to the website and retrieves the drivers. Then I downloaded them from the website and used the download to install to my Windows 11 unit. Again, NOT THE DRIVERS! The download unzipped and the .exe was the same installation wizard that the disk gives you, and it went to the website to download the drivers. What happens 5 years from now if I ever have to reinstall the drivers? I don’t have them. Will they be available from Canon or will the scanner then be unusable? Anyway, the installation was easy and worked on both Windows versions. It’s the same scanner user interface on both computers. You go through and set all the settings for each option. I find scanning to desktop easiest, and it was doable. There is no power button, it’s plug & play and powered by your USB connection. It works, and in my opinion is very quiet compared to videos I saw of the unit. It works from the scanner to the computer by the front buttons and from the scanner interface itself, which has more controls. You still have to set the settings on the interface to scan from the buttons on the unit anyway. The depth of color seemed normal as opposed to my previous experience above. In the past, I scanned on 200 dpi and had good scans. This used 300 dpi which makes a bigger file and I got good scans of documents and ok scans of pictures. Attached is a sample of a scanned document with pictures on it. The picture quality is somewhat degraded. I tried the COPY button which copies to your printer and you can see, it completely changed the colors and changed the text size and clarity, but the same copy to print to pdf instead of to the printer created a very clear document in the correct colors and clear text onto the computer, which then printed out nicely. I tried calling about the copy to printer function inverting all the colors, only to find there is no tech support for this product. You cannot be connected to a human. It’s FAQ’s and “online ‘support’ “ only, which means you're completely on your own. Anyway, there are ways to make it work if you experiment. Scan Gear helps but when you get to color adjustment forget it. You need a digital image editor instead. Scan Gear is where you can adjust to the highest possible resolution. Regular settings only let you do 600 dpi. As far as scanners go, I’ve used many, when they used to make them well as opposed to now, I’d say this is pretty good if you’re using it now and then. All scanners change the original image slightly. Text documents are very good. Hopefully it still works after a year. Other reviews say it stops working after a period of time. Nothing is good anymore. Price wise, it’s a bit high for the craftsmanship of the unit. Treat it gently. The stand is a bit baffling. Why would you scan with the unit standing on its side and the cover opening up? Why would you use the stand to store it that way either? The rules have always said that that’s bad for the electronics in anything.

A great low-profile scanner that's perfect for infrequent uses. Power and data in one cable is a major plus in that you don't have to hunt for an outlet, it's quite portable. Software does exactly what you'd expect it to and using the quick scan buttons on the scanner itself is a godsend. Every scan I've ever done involved plugging it into my laptop, pressing the button once, having the scan saved to my cloud folder, and then closing the laptop once it synced. It takes less than a minute. Scan quality is excellent and the built-in dust and smudge removal works quite well. I haven't tried to use it vertically (what is this, a Playstation?), so I can't speak to how effective it is in that orientation, but the lifting lid for scanning books is something I never knew I needed. All-around just the perfect scanner for my use case.

Today, 5/4/2024, Amazon's product page says that this LiDE 400 scanner is 7.7" x 14.5" x 0.4". That's nonsensical (since this is a flatbed scanner that scans 8.5" wide originals), and false. Further, if I ask for the product dimensions (hoping that someone beat me to it by providing corrected dimensions), Amazon's AI frontend to the many user Q&A responses embellishes this, answering "The product dimensions are 14.5 inches in length, 7.7 inches in width, and 0.4 inches in height. *This allows the scanner to fit in small spaces while still scanning standard 8.5x11 inch documents.*" ("*" emphasis added). Mine just arrived today, and its measurements agree with Canon's own product documentation: ~9.9" x 14.5" x 1.7". And I can't find the term "Slim" in any of Canon's official naming of this product. The box and the literature I've seen all say "Canoscan LiDE 400 Color Image Scanner". I use VueScan, so I ignored the software CD. The scanner came right up and worked as expected, first time. So far, so good.