Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Digital compare to film

  1. #1
    Senior Member denniskee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    bukit batok
    Posts
    5,468

    Default Digital compare to film

    Am I right to say that comparing a DLSR with a 1.6x FOV to a 35mm film is the same a comparing a 35mm film to a medium format?

    If so, when I take the same shot using medium format can give a a 15R photo without significant loss in sharpness, whese as 35mm can go up to say 8R (both using prime lens). Can I say that using a DSLR with prime lens for the same shot can blow up to say 6R?

    I am saying this because the size of the CMOS / CCD in a typical DLSR (less the 1Ds and 1D) is smaller than a 35mm film.

    Can fellow CS pls correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.
    photography makes one sees things from all angles.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by denniskee
    Am I right to say that comparing a DLSR with a 1.6x FOV to a 35mm film is the same a comparing a 35mm film to a medium format?
    It's not the same.


    If so, when I take the same shot using medium format can give a a 15R photo without significant loss in sharpness, whese as 35mm can go up to say 8R (both using prime lens). Can I say that using a DSLR with prime lens for the same shot can blow up to say 6R?

    I am saying this because the size of the CMOS / CCD in a typical DLSR (less the 1Ds and 1D) is smaller than a 35mm film.
    Using your example, how big you can blow the DSLR image up is related to the resolution, ie 6, 12, 14 megapixels etc. It's the resolution that counts.

    MF has a higher resolution than 35 mm because of the larger film size although the film grain size is the same.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    997

    Default

    To my understanding (am not a pro) the 1.6X FOV and print size are
    not directly related. 1.6x factor is due to sensor size smaller than
    film size. Some explanation is here :

    http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/dslrvsfilm.htm

    The FOV also varies depending on sensor size for example
    Olympus E-1's 4/3 sensor is 2x the focal length.

    The print size depends on size of the picture measured in
    megapixels ( say 1536x1024 = 1.57MP) and also the
    resolution in DPI. At 200 dpi vertical and horizontal
    resolution you can print this image at 7.6" x 5".

  4. #4
    Senior Member denniskee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    bukit batok
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    You can print about a 8R, but is the quality as good as a ISO100 film 8R print?
    photography makes one sees things from all angles.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    997

    Default

    You can find lots of articles, debates on Film vs Digital in the web / forums.

    IMO for image quality, it's not just the MP, but the sensor performance
    in terms resolution, noise, colour, White balance etc are more important.

    Canon's D30, 3MP DSLR picture look far better some of newer 5MP prosumer and P&S cameras. So image size (megapixel) alone will not determine the
    picture quality. Some of megazines I've read says DSLRs like Canon
    10D, fuji S2 Pro and Nikon D100 are comparable to 35mm film. Some
    say cameras these are better 35mm films. Some film fans say nothing
    beats film yet.

    One recent article I read, made comparison between EOS 1Ds (11MP) and
    35mm and medium format films. They say this camera exceeded 35mm picture
    quality and comparable to medium format (Don't ask me which medium format ).

    Just get a nice full size pictures taken from one of these cameras
    ( plenty in the review sites ) make a print (send to a shop) and see
    for yourself.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •