Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I would put forth that any attempt to determine an equivalent to film in terms of pixels is doomed. Why.... well if you are going to put a decent sized picture on a web page..... you only need say 400 x 600 pixels of information... It doesn't really matter whether your scanner can resolve every bit of information on a piece of 35mm film shot with your M, let alone what an 8x10 camera could record. You can make the same arguments about film.... And people have been doing it since Oscar Barnack's time.... If you are going to make a 4x5 print in a magazine. Chances are that it will be difficult to tell what was shot with 35, 2 1/4, 4 x 5 or 8 x10.... everybody knows there is more detail on a 8x10 piece of film than on a 35mm one...... The issue isn't what the equivalent is... the issue is whether or not you can tell the difference in the final result, whether it's a print, printed piece or website etc.... And then most importantly whether it matters or not. Michael Reichmann says that he likes the stuff from the D 30 better than film up until about 10x 13 inches... So... one would have to say that is a rough equivalent to film assuming you are scanning film to do digital prints as he is ... on the other hand that's not the same as making real prints for better or for worse...... So..... If anyone is expecting to come up with an exact number..... And I know there are plenty of engineer types who love this kind of stuff..... I'd say you're doomed from the start. Duane Birkey HCJB World Radio Quito Ecuador Duane's Photographs of Ecuador http://duane_birkey.tripod.com