>>2692450currently using a Coolscan 8000 and looking to upgrade to an Imacon so I can scan my 4x5 shit.
DSLRs or flat beds look fine if you are only posting to web but don't bother if you are printing
>>2692580you do realize that your camera costs less than a single drum scan
No scanner can make up for resolution that is not there, if you are shooting kodak gold 800, my coolscan will out resolve it. What you get with higher end scanners is a better Dmax and Dmin, or better colour and gradation.
None of it really matters when it is posted to web as a JPEG and browsers do whatever they want with the file.
What you scan with only really matters when it comes to what you print with and what you print on and how large you print.
If you ever get a chance to stand in front of a Jeff Wall, you will know why drum scanning is still around.
