(Mike) writes:

Has anyone a link or material to share regarding how digital camera's
compare to scanning film on a film scanner?

Is the sensor technology the same or is one better than the other?

Assuming I had the same number of megapixels would one have better
color information than the other? For example, reading about CMOS
sensors in digital cameras, each pixel is a gray value in RAW. The
camera then interprets the colors based on surrounding pixels and the
bayer filter values, is that the way film scanners work too?

Any other major differences in quality of output?

Generally speaking, digital-original pixels (captured directly with a
digital camera) are worth considerably more than scanned-film pixels;
that is, a 6 megapixel digital original is much better than a 6
megapixel film scan. I don't think there's a clear factor; I use 2x
as a rule of thumb, but it's very rough and not arrived at by any
scientific process. The quality of the digital camera also makes a
difference; the bigger sensors on digital SLRs really do give lower
noise and hence better pictures, especially at high ISO.

Scanners actually scan each primary color at each pixel individually,
unlike most digital SLRs. This makes less difference than you might
expect (see all the Sigma/Foveon threads), but it makes some
difference.

Scanning takes quite a lot of time (or costs quite a lot of money).
Workflow issues are driving many high-volume professionals to shooting
digitally even if other reasons don't.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/