Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/05/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples
From: richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man)
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 13:25:28 -0700
References: <BLU124-DS1C4C5B86A87C431DF5A93D44F0@phx.gbl> <C6482121.4F42E%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Why are we fighting the digital vs. film war again? :-)

This is the Death Age of film! This iiiiiis the Golden Age of Film!?

Digital and film are different. Digital LOOKS sharper, there is no amount of
theoretical MTF or whatever can dispute that. Most people will pick an
enlargement from even a 3/6 MP digital and say it looks sharper than a
Velvia drum scan. Studies have proven that.

OTOH, film looks different and if you like the look, what other time in
history can you pick up all these CHEAP gears and have a ball shooting for
pennies a negative?

6x7 neg is $.50 each. I develop my own so it only costs pennies. I already
have the scanner so no additional cost there. Heck, one can probably pick up
a 6x7 enlarger for couple hundred bucks (hmmm... I think the one I have in
my garage is a 6x7 capable enlarger...) and the Mamiya 7II is LIGHTER than
my E-3, let alone the D3X etc. monster. I carried 3 lens and a camera and
didn't even feel it while hiking!!

Use whatever gear you like and go out and shoot....

-- 
// richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
// w: http://www.rfman.com
// b: http://rfman.wordpress.com


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples)
In reply to: Message from leicar at q.com (Aram Langhans) ([Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples)