|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
03-04-2014, 08:30 AM
|
| |
You can get okay scans from a cheap flatbed. Medium format scans on a flatbed (in my experience) are always better than 35mm scans on a flatbed. That said, they both still kind of suck. And anything that's going to produce really impressive scans will likely be VERY expensive. If you need really good scans, I'd say send them to NCPS or The Darkroom. I've mostly given up on scans and started printing them myself. Setting up a darkroom in the basement turned out to be a lot cheaper than a really good scanner. Also, 8x10 prints scan a lot better than negatives on a flatbed.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
03-04-2014, 08:12 AM
|
| |
While I'm sure that the 67 will give you better image quality with its much larger negatives, and you could fix or replace a K1000 for next to nothing, let me just say that the Pentax 645n is my favorite camera. It's just so well designed and easy to use. It feels great in the hands. It has auto everything when you want it. These are subjective qualities, of course, and objectively, you'll be likely to get better results from the 67. But the 645n is comparably priced (I got mine with the AF 75 and manual 150 for about $500) and simple and very well designed. Can't say the same for the original 645, which kind of looks like an ergonomics disaster to me. Also, old 6x6 TLRs are abundant, cheap and fun. And you could even get and 500-series Hasselblad for pretty cheap, although I suspect the lenses would be painfully expensive.
|
