I think there are many peop;e out there who struggle on if they should purchase a scanner or not. I believe there is no queastion in myy mind if you still shoot film or have lots of old negs, slides then it is a must.
When I went back to using film after digital I purchased a 4870 Epson scanner and R800 printer. At the time I felt it was more money then I wanted to spend, but I knew my 35mm slides and negs, would produce some impressive digital files to work with. I felt it gave me much more to work with then files from my digital camera at the time. I was right. Even though there was much to learn about the problems concerning scanning, the 4870 make it much easier.
Now I shoot some medium format film and the scans are even better to work with. I can turn out very impressive 8+10 prints. Is it time comsumming? Yes, but I find it is also rewarding if you have the time. So I believe if it is a hobby and you have a good 35mm SLR then you also will find the time worth while. I have been scanning film for about a year and have scanned a couple thousand images, 35mm and medum format. I have come to the conclusion that if you have 35mm SLR then it is a good move to scan.
The prices of flatbed scanners and deicated film scanners have come down in price and are better than ever. So I think why not have one even if you do use digital cameras part of the time. I have found than scanning different film can have some interesting results. Kodak Tri-X, Plus X, Ilford, Fuji films all have there own characteristics when scanned.
In a digital world with digtal SLRs that now produce nice smooth images, I still find that film images scanned to be more interesting. I think for those who do not know if they should scan or not scan just try it. Thanks Monte Johnson. " A film scanned is attached."