Another option is to photograph a slide with a digital camera. Good enough for may uses. Did this yesterday with the Ds and Sigma 50mm Macro. Full size - 270k highly compressed Jpeg. Grain on slide is not quite as apparent. http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/Dickie_Fowl-Chick-3.jpg Doesn't work to well with negatives. I have done MF b/w negs on the light table with OK results.
Powell > >If the question is wether to get a digital camera or a flatbed "neg" >scnanner, the answer is: >Get a digital camera. > >If the question is wether to get a digital camera or a film scanner, the >answer is: >Get a digtal camera. > >If the question is wether to get a film scanner or a flatbed scanner for >film, the answer is: Get a film scanner. > >If the question is wether to get a digital MF camera or a faltbed scanner or >a film scanner for 120 film, the anser is probably: Get the scanner if you >alrady have MF film equipment. >Digital MF cameras are still too expensive unless you shoot several rolls >every day. If you must count your working hours, the cost of film and time >spent scanning - you must have a digital camera. Don't scan. Take pictures. >I bought a nice MZ-S a year ago. I have shot maybe 5 rolls with it. > > >I talked to an old pro this afternoon. He has both film and flatbed >scanners. Fladtbed for his Hassies. Film scanner for 35mm film (Olympus >OM4Ti). And he uses a Minolta digital camera with a fixed zoom lens from >time to time. >By the way - DSLR's cost no more than a film scanner. If you choose a >Pentax, you may still use you "analog" lenses for the next 5-10 years. > >Jens Bladt >http://www.jensbladt.dk
