Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 13, 2002, 5:14 PM   #1
Junior Member
JoshM's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3
Default DigiCam vs Film Scanner

I am the editor of my high school's yearbook and we are considering upgrading from a traditional 35mm camera. We are not at all happy with the qualtiy. From a roll of 24 pictures, we usually get 5 usable photos. Do you recommend a digital camera over a film scanner, or visa versa? Our main concern is quality and price. We need a 300 dpi photo. A 4 or 5 MP image would be sufficient for our needs. Any responses would be greatly appreciated.
JoshM is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 13, 2002, 10:35 PM   #2
Mango's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 53
Default it depends

I went to my /old/ high school (MBIS) reunion, where I didn't graduate because I had to tranfer out . there I saw old yearbooks w/ my classmates in it and there : I thought I should return later to take close-up shots of the many, many pages .

as for my case above, TIME was the factor so it had to be close-ups from a digi-camera . but if restoring old photos from yearbooks is the case, it would better be a scanner, although more time-consuming because you'll have to re-position page after page .

if you're going to buy a scanner for the school, it better be a durable one, for /many/ ppl R going to use it . say either Epson, HP or Agfa . don't yonder off to the cheaper Taiwanese models, although a better deal for private use .

if it's just for reportage, go for digital cameras . now is a good time to migrate from film because the sharpness is /almost/ getting there on level of film .
besides the TIME & SPACE U save by sticking w/ digital would be ENORMOUS in the long run . your editor would insert your photo into his/her column in a SNAP too .

this is in readying yourselves for the CD-ROM /or/ on-line version of your yearbook also . so wake up to the smell of StarBucks in the new digital age .

but .. ofcourse, any serious yearbook club should have BOTH a scanner and a digital camera . wait, make that 2 : 1 compact & 1 workhorse

enjoy, for those pictures would give pleasure to many, hereafter
Mango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2002, 11:14 PM   #3
Lin Evans's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,141

The primary advantage for your purposes is that digital has instant feedback. You can look at the images and re-shoot if you don't like the results without the necessity and costs of developing and printing.

If you really want the best results, and your budget will permit it, I would look for either a D30 or D60 Canon. Either will more than handle the requirements for quality. Depending on the print size, you may or may not need to interpolate (done transparently by most software) the image to get your 300 dpi for the printer. The D30 is a 3 megapixel camera - the D60 is a six megapixel camera. You can probably pick up a used D30 for around $1500 and a new D60, if you can find one, is about $2200. These cameras take standard Canon 35mm lenses. For portraits or normal yearbook shots, an inexpensive lens like the Canon F1.8 USM (about $85) will do very well. Yes, you "could" use a consumer/prosumer camera for this purpose, but the removable lens digital SLR's get considerably better results because of their larger sensor and much improved signal to noise ratio resulting in extremely clean images.

Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2002, 12:51 AM   #4
Senior Member
mdorani's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 105

Digicam is better
mdorani is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:05 PM.