Copying old photographs: Can the output of a good desktop scanner (under $500?) approach that of direct photography using a quality camera and macro lens? I've compared my few-years-old HP scanjet 4570c set to its highest scan resolution... then photographed the same picture with a Canon 5D and 100mm macro lens, both sent to PhotoShop CS3. Scanned image is okay, but certainly doesn't match camera-macro lens output. Downside of the camera method is time consumption, maybe 30 minutes. Whereas, the scanner might only take 3 minutes and is direct to computer. Output quality is the objective. Restoration and preservation work.