All my films are scanned on a Canon 9550F flat bed scanner.  I have found this to be very versatile; being able to scan documents and pictures up to A4, and film up to 5 X 4.  It cost considerably less than a dedicated film scanner but is capable of scanning all types of film up to a resolution of 4800dpi and to a very high quality - the only limit to the resolution will be the final file size: a scan from 35mm film at 4800dpi will generate a file size of approximately 88MB.  Therefore scans from 120 medium format film are carried out at a resolution of 2400dpi  which will make the file size similar to that of scans from 35mm. The only drawback I have found with this scanner compared to a dedicated film scanner is that scanning times can be quite long with a typical scan taking about 12 minutes.

 

I scan both colour print and reversal (slide) film, both of which give very good results.  I have a slight preference for colour print film because it can handle high contrast situations better than reversal film and it is more forgiving in its exposure latitude.  These characteristics make it more flexible and provide more consistency with the final image.

 

Which produces the best quality images digital or film?  The resulting images are different rather than one being better than the other and both exhibit their own qualities.  Images captured digitally are always much sharper, but film has the advantage of having better tonal gradations and more depth.  Which is better is purely down to the subject matter and personal choice.