I think a valid comparison would be cameras with similar handling. What's the point of comparing a big slow-handling camera with a more compact, quicker-handling camera?
Here's my 'eyeball crop' image:
made with a 10MP Leica DMR at ISO 400 and 280mm f/4 APO lens. When I compared this camera and lens with the same lens on a Leicaflex SL with Kodachrome 25 (similar-handling cameras) the difference was very clear and as it turned out I was glad it was my last roll of K25.
Note: the full image of the bird is cropped from the original file.
that's all fine and good, but now you have to blow your image up another 300-400% to compare it to dan's (thrice) image for zooming into the same proportion of the image. his crop is much smaller than yours, you need to substantially upscale your 10mp image to get the same sized crop. dan's crop looks pretty good to me considering it's basically from a wall sized print.
sebboh wrote:
that's all fine and good, but now you have to blow your image up another 300-400% to compare it to dan's (thrice) image for zooming into the same proportion of the image. his crop is much smaller than yours, you need to substantially upscale your 10mp image to get the same sized crop. dan's crop looks pretty good to me considering it's basically from a wall sized print.
Exactly! I should've added that in my rather short post.
I still don't see how Dan's comparison of 4x5 film with small-format refutes the claim that digital is more powerful. It seems that it's the 4x5 that is the attraction.
I recently attended a lecture by Stephen Johnson (http://sjphoto.com/) who compared 8x10 Ektachrome with the BetterLight 4x5 scanning back and found that for his purposes the digital files gave him much more detail and flexibility. If that's not "more powerful" I don't know what is. His film use dropped to zero immediately. If Dan were to compare scanned C41 4x5 with digital medium format (DMF) I suspect that 4x5 film would be more difficult to rationalize. The samples I've seen from several brands and models of DMF cameras with good lenses simply leave his eyeball crop in the dustbin of history.
Again, I don't see the point of comparing 4"x5" film with 24mm x 36mm digital. The vast majority of those who want to make wall-sized prints have found that MFD or a BetterLight scanning back is a better comparison and that the power and flexibilty of these digital systems makes better prints.
The only rational justification I can see for large-format film is the up-front cost of MFD camera systems, and the initial cost advantage of film cameras diminishes quite rapidly when the expense of the film and processing is factored in.
telyt wrote:
Again, I don't see the point of comparing 4"x5" film with 24mm x 36mm digital. The vast majority of those who want to make wall-sized prints have found that MFD or a BetterLight scanning back is a better comparison and that the power and flexibilty of these digital systems makes better prints.
price is what makes a FF digital versus 4x5 film comparison relavent.
sebboh wrote:
that's all fine and good, but now you have to blow your image up another 300-400% to compare it to dan's (thrice) image for zooming into the same proportion of the image. his crop is much smaller than yours, you need to substantially upscale your 10mp image to get the same sized crop. dan's crop looks pretty good to me considering it's basically from a wall sized print.
This is among my biggest prints. If not cropped it would be about 20" x 30" and the detail and color makes gallery owners and their clients speechless. I doubt I could have made this photo with a 4x5 camera, with 35mm films that would have given me comparable ISO (which I needed for this photo) I would not print larger than 8"x10", the annual cost of owning the camera (assuming zero resale value) for six years has been equivalent to about 3 months of my prior film use. Lower cost, bigger prints, I call that far more powerful.
sebboh wrote:
price is what makes a FF digital versus 4x5 film comparison relavent.
A better comparison is between cameras that are designed for the same or similar tasks. Comparing on price is like comparing a pickup truck to a similar-priced sports car.
