I am surprised by this. Normally one expect that drums scans and high end scanners like the imacons should have an advantage.
Maybe it old wisdom that has become an anachronism.
Do you have a link to a comparison, if possible not made by a vendor of either? If not, then even a vendor based comparison will help.
In my case the use of the scanner is just for fun. I have an old rangefinder and I am thinking of getting an xpan, so no need for the "best", but I am intrigued.
Best regards,
Absolutely, shoot me an email and I can reply with a link to a set of comparison test files against a Tango operated by a vet of scanning. The files are very, very large so sharing them in a fully public link is a technical challenge. But we're glad to send them to anyone even if it's only an academic/fun interest.
Or if you are ever in NYC and would like to bring by a piece of film to scan (and make your own comparison against whatever alternative option you want to get a scan done by) we're glad to provide that as well.
Re: expectations of drum scanners - like scanning backs, they were by far and away the best option of their era;
years ahead of their time. But the last time anyone invested significantly in R+D for either technology was well over a decade ago. Technology marches forward. Prior to 60mp and 80mp backs and the Schneider 120 ASPH lens it was hard for us to compete with high-end scanning; now it is fairly routine (except for scanning 8x10 where high end scanners are still very competitive).
As a fringe benefit the workflow is an order of magnitude or two faster than using a film scanner assuming you're doing any meaningful quantity
.