Digital compare to film


Status
Not open for further replies.

denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#1
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.
 

May 24, 2003
334
0
16
Singapore
Visit site
#2
denniskee said:
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.
 

Caussway

New Member
Dec 8, 2003
997
0
0
47
Malaysia
Visit site
#3
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".
 

Caussway

New Member
Dec 8, 2003
997
0
0
47
Malaysia
Visit site
#5
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 :dunno: ).

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.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom