I've scanned and used a digicam on a copy stand and have come to prefer the latter method. I found the scanner was more likely to have issues with surface artifacts that I could usually control by changing the angle of the light on a copy stand. Like JOSarff above, I've done my own copy work for years and have appropriate lenses and lighting, and it's not much different with a DSLR than it is with a film camera. Print size is not a limitation with a camera, and I can digitize negatives and transparencies using a light box. If I want more resolution than the camera provides, I can shoot multiple tiles and stitch.

Here's a DSLR on a copy stand in use at the Scott Polar Research center--

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pict....html?image=13

When my scanner got too streaky to use anymore, I was glad to be rid of it, and I don't even use my 35mm film scanner anymore.