Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> .....I suppose which side of the fence you are on means you are going to > promote your team. Steve, You're certainly correct, but badly done testing (or biased, intentional or not, reading of the results) is simply unacceptable. I don't mean to sound arrogant at all, but I'm not on any fence with respect to this issue. I have been designing digital imaging equipment for over 20 years, and I have done VERY extensive testing in this area, and I know the facts first hand. I KNOW that claim is simply wrong. I've done hundreds and hundreds of tests, and the conclusions drawn by this "article" are simply flawed, or misleading at the least. A VERY poorly exposed, developed and scanned, 10 year outdated high speed film that was sitting on the dashboard of one's south facing car, in Florida, for a week, before being developed, would probably be inferior to an 11M pixel Bayer patterned camera. Is that "fair" to use images from that as the poster child for film? Of course not. Also, sharpness has nothing to do with resolution, as I stated in another post. It's something that is commonly misperceived. Regards, Austin - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html