Prev: help: Panasonic Scanner: RTIV bundled software
Next: Canon scanner problem
From: LouisB on 13 Jul 2007 14:55
I'm thinking about returning to film photography (an odd step because I
currently use digital). The thing that would swing it for me is the ease and
quality of home scanning. I am not a professional photographer but I am a
serious amateur. I would like to be able to scan and print without the pain
of finding a studio to do it for me.

I am totally out of touch with current scanning technology. A search of
google suggests there is really only one game in town: Nikon Coolscan.

If this is the case then the decision is between the LS-50 and the 5000-ED
(hope I've got that right). There seems to be a sizeable difference in price
between the two (in the UK at least).

Nikon seem to imply that if all you need are pictures for web pages then go
for the LS-50 whereas if you require "professional" use then you need the
5000-ED. Is this marketing hype or would I find the LS-50 lacking if I want
quality enlargements?

Finally, am I out of my mind and should I just accept that the world has
gone digital and buy a better digital camera?

TIA if anyone cares to post a response

LouisB
------
"I'm a half-wit. I sold the other half on e-Bay"


From: Talker on 13 Jul 2007 18:59
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:55:18 GMT, "LouisB"
<louisREMOVEberkREMOVE2002(a)hotmail.REMOVEcom> wrote:

>I'm thinking about returning to film photography (an odd step because I
>currently use digital). The thing that would swing it for me is the ease and
>quality of home scanning. I am not a professional photographer but I am a
>serious amateur. I would like to be able to scan and print without the pain
>of finding a studio to do it for me.
>
>I am totally out of touch with current scanning technology. A search of
>google suggests there is really only one game in town: Nikon Coolscan.
>
>If this is the case then the decision is between the LS-50 and the 5000-ED
>(hope I've got that right). There seems to be a sizeable difference in price
>between the two (in the UK at least).
>
>Nikon seem to imply that if all you need are pictures for web pages then go
>for the LS-50 whereas if you require "professional" use then you need the
>5000-ED. Is this marketing hype or would I find the LS-50 lacking if I want
>quality enlargements?
>
>Finally, am I out of my mind and should I just accept that the world has
>gone digital and buy a better digital camera?
>
>TIA if anyone cares to post a response
>
>LouisB
>------
>"I'm a half-wit. I sold the other half on e-Bay"
>

Hi there LouisB! Well, I'm an amateur photographer myself, and
reading many photography mags, and subscribing to numerous newsgroups,
I would have to say that film photography is dying out, and digital is
the way to go. There are so many pluses with digital that it only
makes sense to me to go with digital.
What type of digital camera do you use now? If you also use film
cameras, what would make you want to stay with film? I have used both
film and digital cameras, and my film camera hasn't seen the light of
day since I got my first digital camera.(an Olympus C2500 L). I now
use a Canon Digital Rebel, but am thinking about moving up to a 5D.
Is there something about film that you like that you feel isn't
available with digital?

Talker
From: LouisB on 13 Jul 2007 18:19
> Hi there LouisB! Well, I'm an amateur photographer myself, and
> reading many photography mags, and subscribing to numerous newsgroups,
> I would have to say that film photography is dying out, and digital is
> the way to go. There are so many pluses with digital that it only
> makes sense to me to go with digital.
> What type of digital camera do you use now? If you also use film
> cameras, what would make you want to stay with film? I have used both
> film and digital cameras, and my film camera hasn't seen the light of
> day since I got my first digital camera.(an Olympus C2500 L). I now
> use a Canon Digital Rebel, but am thinking about moving up to a 5D.
> Is there something about film that you like that you feel isn't
> available with digital?
>
> Talker

Talker, thanks for the response. I'm beginning to come round to your way of
thinking. I am currently using an Epson digital rangefinder, the RD-1 and
the only upgrade is to go for the Leica M8, unless I consider going film.
However, I am rapidly reconsidering and have to admit defeat. It seems that
all the advice I am getting both here and in other groups is to go digital.

Thanks for your interest

LouisB


From: Philip Homburg on 13 Jul 2007 18:43
In article <qUPli.6598$w97.228(a)fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
LouisB <louisREMOVEberkREMOVE2002(a)hotmail.REMOVEcom> wrote:
>Nikon seem to imply that if all you need are pictures for web pages then go
>for the LS-50 whereas if you require "professional" use then you need the
>5000-ED. Is this marketing hype or would I find the LS-50 lacking if I want
>quality enlargements?

If you are going to scan lots of film, speed will be quite important.
It is hard to say whether multi-sample scanning is really required or not.

As far as I can tell from the specs, those are the main differences between
the LS-50 and the LS-5000.

>Finally, am I out of my mind and should I just accept that the world has
>gone digital and buy a better digital camera?

I like film, so I going to stay with film for at least the near future.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
From: Talker on 14 Jul 2007 05:50
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:19:10 GMT, "LouisB"
<louisREMOVEberkREMOVE2002(a)hotmail.REMOVEcom> wrote:

>> Hi there LouisB! Well, I'm an amateur photographer myself, and
>> reading many photography mags, and subscribing to numerous newsgroups,
>> I would have to say that film photography is dying out, and digital is
>> the way to go. There are so many pluses with digital that it only
>> makes sense to me to go with digital.
>> What type of digital camera do you use now? If you also use film
>> cameras, what would make you want to stay with film? I have used both
>> film and digital cameras, and my film camera hasn't seen the light of
>> day since I got my first digital camera.(an Olympus C2500 L). I now
>> use a Canon Digital Rebel, but am thinking about moving up to a 5D.
>> Is there something about film that you like that you feel isn't
>> available with digital?
>>
>> Talker
>
>Talker, thanks for the response. I'm beginning to come round to your way of
>thinking. I am currently using an Epson digital rangefinder, the RD-1 and
>the only upgrade is to go for the Leica M8, unless I consider going film.
>However, I am rapidly reconsidering and have to admit defeat. It seems that
>all the advice I am getting both here and in other groups is to go digital.
>
>Thanks for your interest
>
>LouisB
>

No problem LouisB. I take it that the reason you'd upgrade to
the Leica M8 is because you have lenses that will fit it.(a good
reason to stay with a particular brand.)
One of the best reasons to go with digital is because of the
immediacy of it....you can see your pictures as you take them.
A friend of mine in Australia said that when she does a
photoshoot, she only needs to take two pictures to get her camera
setup for the shoot. She takes one picture and checks the histogram
on the camera, then makes her adjustments to the camera and shoots the
second shot. If it's not perfect, she'll make a minor adjustment and
then she's ready to shoot.
I remember reading an article about a photographer who was hired
by a magazine to get a shot that showed a tennis pro jumping over the
net as if he just won a match. The photographer said that he took 25
rolls of film with him to make sure he had enough. He said that after
numerous hours of taking shots, he felt that he finally got enough
shots to guarantee that he got the shot he was looking for.
I couldn't help but feel that if he had used a digital camera, he
could see if he got the shot he was after as soon as he took it, and
if he didn't he would know what he needed to adjust to make sure he
got it. It would have saved him a lot of film, developing costs, and
time.

Talker

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: help: Panasonic Scanner: RTIV bundled software
Next: Canon scanner problem