Is it true ?


Status
Not open for further replies.

Richearth

Member
Feb 20, 2006
297
2
18
Hi, dear rangefinder members,

It is saying, in 5 years time, CCD quality will be much better than film. Due to Kodak closed down and fujifilm concentrate on digital, 1 roll of film will be priced at $100. but of course leh, give yor picture worse than the CCD.

and .....,

M7 will be on sell @ $5, and MP @ $7, at ClubSnap buy and sell,

and.....,

M lens can not be used in digital leica body,

ah.....,
 

LittleWolf

New Member
Jan 23, 2005
1,095
0
0
Singapore
Richearth said:
It is saying, in 5 years time, CCD quality will be much better than film.
Some would say this is already the case today. It depends on the criteria.

M7 will be on sell @ $5, and MP @ $7, at ClubSnap buy and sell,
Never. Too much of a collector's item.
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
In the 1960s, when popularity of transistor started, people said vacuum tube will disappear soon.
In the 1970s, when popularity of color film started, people said B&W film will disappear soon.
In the 1980s, when popularity of CD started, people said analogue LP will disappear soon.

Today, the vacuum tubes are still running on the hi-end audio equipments, hobbyist are still using B&W film, LPs are still praised by audiophiles.
Seems as a medium can not totally vanish if it has certain irreplaceable properties.
Unlike the steam locomotives, which vanished since diesel and electric locomotives emerged, the digital-photography is not a complete replacement for film because both of them has different characters which show up on the result. But the digital will surely replace film at the low-end market (compact and P&S camera) since those market does not sensitive with the resulting image. (The same way as transistors totally replaced vacuum tube at mid-low end of the market. Only at the hi-end market did the vacuum tube survives).

by the way, I would like to bid $100 for a good condition M7 five years from now.;p
 

pipefish

New Member
Dec 23, 2003
344
0
0
Richearth said:
Hi, dear rangefinder members,

It is saying, in 5 years time, CCD quality will be much better than film. Due to Kodak closed down and fujifilm concentrate on digital, 1 roll of film will be priced at $100. but of course leh, give yor picture worse than the CCD.

and .....,

M7 will be on sell @ $5, and MP @ $7, at ClubSnap buy and sell,

and.....,

M lens can not be used in digital leica body,

ah.....,
oh no. another one who got home early from school.
 

fuwen

Senior Member
Aug 11, 2004
2,380
0
36
Singapore, Woodlands
www.fuwen.net
At the present selling price of M7 I doubt it will be sold at $10 even in 20 years time. However by then maybe a EOS-1D will be selling at that price.
 

AReality

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2003
4,464
0
36
VisualJournalist.net
fuwen said:
At the present selling price of M7 I doubt it will be sold at $10 even in 20 years time. However by then maybe a EOS-1D will be selling at that price.
Hammer for $10, not bad... :thumbsup:


.
 

yowch

Senior Member
Oct 16, 2002
1,044
0
36
45
Singapore, Redhill
Visit site
Richearth said:
Hi, dear rangefinder members,

It is saying, in 5 years time, CCD quality will be much better than film.
I happened to drop by, and I am not a rangefinder user. But I have to comment on film vs digital as quoted above.

To me, it is true that CCD HAS exceeded film in quality. This is especially true when you compare, say 35mm film against APS-size sensor. Last year, I shot my church camp photo on my S2pro, and post processed it to print at 300dpi 10"x15". Everyone can be recognised, and there were 300+ people in that 1 photo. A few years back, another camp photo had about 200 people, shot on film and blown up to 8"x10", and it is a real struggle to identify the individuals, due to film grain. Now that is ISO 200 CCD vs ISO 160 professional film.

Digital will give you the 'jaggies', which software can help. Film will give you grain that softens the image when blown up, and causes bluriness. Between the two, I'll say digital is cleaner.

Still, the dynamic range of film is better.

OK, that's my own experience and decision. I can accept those who says film is better, so let's not go into another film vs digital war.
 

fuwen

Senior Member
Aug 11, 2004
2,380
0
36
Singapore, Woodlands
www.fuwen.net
yowch said:
I happened to drop by, and I am not a rangefinder user. But I have to comment on film vs digital as quoted above.

To me, it is true that CCD HAS exceeded film in quality. This is especially true when you compare, say 35mm film against APS-size sensor. Last year, I shot my church camp photo on my S2pro, and post processed it to print at 300dpi 10"x15". Everyone can be recognised, and there were 300+ people in that 1 photo. A few years back, another camp photo had about 200 people, shot on film and blown up to 8"x10", and it is a real struggle to identify the individuals, due to film grain. Now that is ISO 200 CCD vs ISO 160 professional film.

Digital will give you the 'jaggies', which software can help. Film will give you grain that softens the image when blown up, and causes bluriness. Between the two, I'll say digital is cleaner.

Still, the dynamic range of film is better.

OK, that's my own experience and decision. I can accept those who says film is better, so let's not go into another film vs digital war.
I am surprised. I thought CCD interpolate between pixels and film captured actual details and therefore film should be more 'correct'. I assume u are comparing apple to apple i.e. comparable lens was used on the SLR and DSLR?
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
fuwen said:
I am surprised. I thought CCD interpolate between pixels and film captured actual details and therefore film should be more 'correct'. I assume u are comparing apple to apple i.e. comparable lens was used on the SLR and DSLR?
Not a surprise. Film can be very good and can be very bad.
Film should be "more correct", but it also has grains which sometimes may obscure the details.
Some types of film have so much grains, while some others are very fine grain.
An under-exposed film yields much more grains than a properly exposed one.
Some types of film, especially portrait films, will result better (and finer grains) with a slight over-exposed.
Shorter development time also gives more grains.

Therefore, it is much easier to get details out from digital, only a truly experienced film-user will be able to excel.
 

LittleWolf

New Member
Jan 23, 2005
1,095
0
0
Singapore
fuwen said:
I am surprised. I thought CCD interpolate between pixels and film captured actual details and therefore film should be more 'correct'.
CCDs work on the same principle as films: photon absorbtion results in excitation of electrons. Neither captures "actual" details more than the other. The main difference is that the photoreceptors on a CCD are arranged in a well-ordered lattice, whereas the receptors in films are randomly dispersed.
 

djork

New Member
Jul 14, 2002
1,157
0
0
Hong Kong, Pokfulam
Visit site
fuwen said:
At the present selling price of M7 I doubt it will be sold at $10 even in 20 years time. However by then maybe a EOS-1D will be selling at that price.
haha.. i'd like one to use as a paperweight.
 

Richearth

Member
Feb 20, 2006
297
2
18
djork said:
haha.. i'd like one to use as a paperweight.
at lease - EOS 1D MarkII got more function - also a hammer and paperweight!:thumbsup:
 

Raj_Bai

New Member
Aug 5, 2004
20
0
0
off cos , when hard disk started back then it was 20MB to 30mb and a friend proudly told me that his is 80mb. that is 80 mega byte , he paid about S$850 then. now u see hard is in gigabytes . like wise the CCD will go higher and higher. so 5 years time maybe you have 10 gigabyte CCD, why not. by then the memory card will be bigger and cheaper any you can buy D70 or D200 for $10 at clubsnap buy&sell section.:bsmilie:


Richearth said:
Hi, dear rangefinder members,

It is saying, in 5 years time, CCD quality will be much better than film. Due to Kodak closed down and fujifilm concentrate on digital, 1 roll of film will be priced at $100. but of course leh, give yor picture worse than the CCD.

and .....,

M7 will be on sell @ $5, and MP @ $7, at ClubSnap buy and sell,

and.....,

M lens can not be used in digital leica body,

ah.....,
 

XXX Boy

New Member
Jan 11, 2004
1,159
0
0
44
GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
I dun think Leica M7 will be selling at $5 next time, it is too much precious and precision to sell at such absurb price.
However, as digital technology advances, you will see D200, S3pro selling very cheaply next time.
 

surge

Senior Member
Mar 17, 2002
1,343
2
38
47
north
Visit site
Richearth said:
Hi, dear rangefinder members,

It is saying, in 5 years time, CCD quality will be much better than film. Due to Kodak closed down and fujifilm concentrate on digital, 1 roll of film will be priced at $100. but of course leh, give yor picture worse than the CCD.

and .....,

M7 will be on sell @ $5, and MP @ $7, at ClubSnap buy and sell,

and.....,

M lens can not be used in digital leica body,

ah.....,
M7 even as a paper wt w a 50/2 lens i am willing to pay you $100...such a beautiful cam. sell your M7 to me 5 years later....$100.
 

surge

Senior Member
Mar 17, 2002
1,343
2
38
47
north
Visit site
actually 5 years is not far from now...

if D200 at $20, then D100/D70 will be $10, then D50 will be $8, then coolpix 8400-$5, then the rest of its compact range $0.50 to $5???

i would believe that compacts wil not exist in 5 years time ( hp w good camera up to 5mp will take over), but DSLRs w will stil have its own market
 

Status
Not open for further replies.