UTA_flyinghigh From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 6495 posts, RR: 50 Posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4704 times:
Just reviewed Canoscan and Nikon Coolscan prices, and they're half the price of DSLR's; since I have a huge backlog of CMF and GVA slides, I might be better off acquiring a 35mm slide scanner.
So...Canoscan and Coolscan users, please give feedback about their performance/ease of use/picture quality, etc... as compared to DSLR's like the 10D or D60.
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
Wietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3809 posts, RR: 55
Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4674 times:
Well I've used both and I can say that the DSLR is better for me. All I did when I got my slides back was scan them, not display them on a screen or something.
I used a Nikon Coolscan and while the slides came out great, I love the versitality and the power of the DSLR. Plus the 1.6x crop factor is a great bonus in this hobby.
Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4684 times:
I have a D60... and a Coolscan IVED. There's no comparison in the output, but they both do different things. A 10D will mean a huge reduction in your ongoing costs as you won't be buying film (unless you continue to shoot slides as well), but it won't allow you to process all your old slides. Both the Canon DSLR and the Coolscan produce good results, and I find them both easy to use.
If you're really keen on getting more of your slides on-line and having a digital SLR, maybe a better bet is to buy a slightly cheaper scanner (something like a Minolta Scan Dual III, which also produces good results), and a pre-owned D30/D60.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 63
Reply 5, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4658 times:
I use the Coolscan 4 and I love it. I've used it on Fuji film and on Kodachrome and it produces excellent results with both films.
I guess you have to make a decision based on what you want to do in the future. If you want to remain shooting slides, buy a film scanner. If you don't buy a DSLR, and you can always ask a friend to scan some of your old slides every now and then.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 785 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4570 times:
I've got the 4000ED and would suggest that the DSLR produces a better result up to the uninterpolated image size of the DSLR image - in particular the DSLR handles shadow areas much better and provides a much cleaner image.
As you go beyond the natural size of the DSLR image, the advantage lessens, till, all things being equal, a full size scan from the 4000ED is in my opinion superior to a DSLR image interpolated to the same size.
What I have yet to try (and keep meaning to) is a slide copier with my 10D - this would be a much more convenient way of dealing with my film archive.