2007-03-13 01:49:34 · 6 answers · asked by elliott r 2 in Consumer Electronics ➔ Cameras
I used to take my A4 scanner and computer on holiday with me, but whenever I wanted to take a picture, I would have to find a plug socket, boot up the pc, then tell everyone to stand still for 30 seconds whilst it scanned the image.
Then somebody told me abut these new camera thingys. Don't think they will take off and still using my scanner.
2007-03-13 02:40:21 · answer #1 · answered by Marky 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Never mind the sarcasm in most of the responses; I guess what you're asking is whether scanning prints from films is as good as taking digital pictures, and my experience is no, unless you spend a lot of money for a professional scanner.
Digital photography has you so many benefits over film photography that even if the final picture quality is the same, you're missing out everything that digital offers, including the opportunity to review your shots on the spot, take hundreds of shots without changing film and printing only the shots you want to keep.
2007-03-13 14:06:38 · answer #2 · answered by Rando 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are two completely different pieces of equipment. If you want to copy a piece of paper to a computer, the scanner is better. If you want an image of a landscape, a camera is better.
2007-03-13 01:57:14 · answer #3 · answered by mark 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
cameras take the picture, scanners transfer already taken pictures,negatives,slides onto a computer.
different devices for different uses.
you can't take a scanner out with you to take photos.... you'll never get it round your neck!!
2007-03-13 13:45:13 · answer #4 · answered by andy.suejackson@btinternet.com 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually there is no comparision, both these devices have been created for totally different objective.
2007-03-15 00:19:03 · answer #5 · answered by Shemit 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
depends on where do you want to use the tool.
2007-03-13 02:06:35 · answer #6 · answered by vijay 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋