Scanner or Lens?

CraggyIslander

After an absence of nearly 7 years (due to busted lenses, expensive repairs, setting up a business, looongggish list ) I'm finally getting back into the habit of photography and recently bought an entry level digital SLR (EOS 350D).

I have a large archive of slides (with some real gems) and was thinking about getting a high end scanner like the Canon 9950F to digitise them and maybe even share some for C&C.

However recently I've seen a very nice macro lens from Canon and am very tempted to buy it so as to have a new 'toy' to play with

Problem is, i can only afford one or the other, which would you go for?

elven

You remember how you used to get an attachment for duping slides, that fits on your lens...? I wonder if they are still kicking about.

If you've just got a digital body, and you don't plan on continuing to shoot film, the money would be better spent on the lens. If you want slides scanned for general web use, jessops will do the job well enough, I think it's about 40 they'll do for £10 in the UK, not sure what it is over here though. I think a high end scanner would be overkill.

BUT... if you do intend to keep shooting film... get the scanner, and a set of extension tubes for €110 Macro images ahoy! Ta-dah!

FreeAnd..

If you're talking about the 100mm prime macro lens then i would get that - simply because thats what i want. Although i would like the scanner, why dont you just hold up a bank. I'm in, then i could get all the lenses and scanners aplenty

Zombrex

With elven on this one,

If you are moving over to digital it prob isn't worth your while buying a scanner, even as one as good at the Canon 9950F, just for your old negatives, I'm sure you will find a photo shop in dublin that will make hi-quality scans of your negatives and dump them on a DVD for you, and as they would be using a hi resolution dedicated film scanner the results would be better than the Canon 9950F anyway.

You can always buy the scanner later on if you find yourself going back to film at lot, it is supposed to be a great flatbed scanner for 35mm film

jlang

Don't forget that scanners like this hold their second hand value quite well. You could buy it, use it for the month or year or however long it would take to scan your past work (or as much of it as you want to) and then sell it on second-hand. Buying one second hand yourself could actually see you pretty much break even and still have the money for the new lens.

Of course, if you keep the scanner long-term or decide to shoot more film/slides in the future, the economics change. Also, consider that scanning old pictures quickly becomes repetitive and not fun and shooting new scenes with a new lens is fun.

jlang

One other thing - getting high quality scans done in a shop is quite expensive so if you really want to digitize your old work, you're going to either spend lots of time (scanning) or money (paying for someone else's time). The cost of the scanner would be less of a concern.

Alun

Echo that. If you look at what people are charging for digitizing slides, and if you have a large number of them, you can probably buy the scanner, even a new one, digitize all your slides and sell it on with the loss you'd make being less than you'd pay to get them digitized.

I've digitized a few slides on my Epson flatbed scanner and was pleasantly surprised by the results. It is mind-numbingly tedious though

CraggyIslander

Thanks for all the replies I do still have the old body and will continue to use it for slide photography and doing a few b/w projects.

It is indeed the 100mm canon macro that I'm looking at

I recently organised the 9950 scanner for my dad, together with an A3 printer and the results were simply astonishing.

Think I will go for the lens and ask santa for the scanner as the slides will keep. Or maybe my accountant will let me write it off as business expenses, but probably not :rolleyes:

elven

Either way, let us see the results - new digital pics or scanned slides

mtracey

Jlang's right, get a second-hand scanner, scan all your slides so that they can be seen online, sell it. It will hold its value. Then get yourself the lens you always wanted. Of course you could just stay with film and scan.
Alot to be said for it

joolsveer

I have an Epson flatbed scanner which also scans transparencies and negatives. From time to time I still use film. Recently I visited Belfast where I shot film and digital. When I had the film developed the shop put the photos on a CD for me. I later scanned some of the negatives for reference as I was not happy with the shop scanned resolution.

These are #1 the home scanned shot



#2 the shop scanned shot



I am not happy with the dust and hairs on my version although I was careful in handing the negatives. What do you think?

Oriel

A scanner will be more liable to break and will certainly depreciate in value a lot faster than a scanner. Go with the lens.

rymus

Yes.. get the lens.

CONMIKE12

The lens !!

Fionn

jools you should go back to the shop and ask for a refund, they're terrible!! your own scan is much better
what model of scanner is it? have you not got Digital Ice with it, isn't that supposed to clean up dust and stuff like that?

I'm replacing a dead scanner here (Umax Astra 610P bought around 1989/90) getting a Canon CanoScan 8400F, it'll do photos, slides, and film and it has abuilt in transparency adapter and the film guides work with 35mm slides & film and 120 format film. So it should serve my needs well.
I'm for a scanner!!

joolsveer

It's an Epson 3170 which doesn't have ICE.

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?oid=35836301

My experience of getting scans in shops has not been very good. I can honestly say that I have never got a scan which gave me a digital file of reasonable resolution say 4 megapixels.