I prefer scanner over camera copy, after shooting two to three thousands
slides/negatives, I found color issues on some images which are not easy to
solve. It is more critical with negatives and it also depends on the camera
you used.
The advantage of camera copy is it is very fast, it also provide more
flexibility to exposure. If you have some underexposed or high contrast
slides you can take a few shoots at different exposures and combine
them.
Few months ago I got a V800 at Epson HK with special offer of $540. The
resolution is rather close to my Nikon 4000ED but D-Max is not as good. On
the other hand the V800 does not have Nikon's flare issue. As my Nikon was
dead again (power supply issue after the IEEE1394 interface problem) V800
will be the scanner for my films.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
This raises an old question in my mind. I've got thousands of old slides
to digitize. It's not been done since I dread it. My scanner is an Epson
V700, not bad but not a dedicated film scanner either but it does have
dust/scratch removal.
I don't have an easily used slide copier setup except for the OM bellows
with copier attachment. That's easy to use... on an OM body but I've
never tried (hard enough) to attach it to the 5D and never even thought
about attaching it to the E-M1 until this moment and haven't thought about
the focal length necessary to capture the full 35mm frame.
Who votes for the scanner over re-photography or vice-versa and why?
Chuck Norcutt
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|