In addition to sheer resolving power the possible dynamic range should we worry about dynamic range as well? I would imagine that in theory you could get better retrieval from dark areas of film with a camera setup since you can crank up the light source to whatever brightness that is necessary. That along with exposure bracketing gives you almost unlimited amounts of dynamic range. I have no idea how important that actually is in reality.
For negative film, I don't think there is anything to worry about. Personally, I've never seen a negative with a range of densities that came close to challenging what I was able to record either via my Minolta film scanner or the digital sensor of my Fuji camera.
Slide film is definitely more challenging. I have encountered quite a few slides which did have some faint shadow details that my Minolta film scanner was not able to resolve, but which my digital camera was able to record. These troublesome slides were somewhat denser than average, due to moderate underexposure. When projected, I could see details in shadows, but those details were missing in the scans.
I have never used any film scanner other that my old Minolta Dimâge Scan Elite F-2900, so other film scanners may have brighter lights or better options to control the exposure. I used my Dimâge Scan Elite F-2900 with VueScan, which supports a multiple pass option, which may have helped a little with noise in the shadows, but which did not let me adjust the brightness of the lamp or the length of the exposure. Trying to boost the shadows from the scans with software just resulted in more noise.
With the digital camera setup, I was able to use a brighter light and/or a longer exposure to help bring up the shadow details on those dense slides. As I recall, I did not have any particular problem with keeping highlight detail. I may have tried bracketing exposures, but decided there was not enough benefit to justify make that part of my standard workflow.