some old news - but new to me - Canon 1Ds won 67 medium format in terms od details

[sfoto100]

Hi all


Shootout

The test is done in 2003.

1Ds won pentax 67 film scanned by Imacon in terms of details, and is on par with the 67 film scanned by drum scanner.

he further said:"In the above artcile I make the claim that the 1Ds produces images superior to medium format drum scans. I took a lot of flack for this when the piece first appeared, even though many pros who I have spoken with and who have started working with the camera are also coming to the same conclusion. It therefore gives me a chuckle (and no small satisfaction) to report that the review of the 1Ds in this month's Shutterbug magazine by Jay Abend comes to the same conclusion as I did."


I am not sure.. but it seems convincing. But I have been seeing lots of very great image quality medium format film scanned pictures in Clubsnap, they reveal so much details that i thought DSLR can never produce.

Your thoughts?

 

[sfoto100]

sorry for typo in subject. it should be "some old news - but new to me - Canon 1Ds won medium format 67 in terms of details"

and i guess it should mean most full frame DSLR will will MF 67..

 

[flipfreak]

Because he is comparing sharpness at 100% and u are looking for the art in the photos.

 

[sfoto100]

Because he is comparing sharpness at 100% and u are looking for the art in the photos.

ya it could be that also.. haha.. tks

i think you have MF and FF DSLR, could you share your views on the differences?

 

[Achim Reh]

It is not more than someones opinion. Specially for film, there are 1 million things that you can do wrong when processing and scanning. Looking at the enlarged scan, my first idea is that the processing was incorrect. If you want to shoot high resolution with film , you can find material that is able to resolve more than 400 lp/mm. But of course, you also need to have a lens that is able to make this resolution ( only Zeiss guarantees you more than 480 lp/mm on medium format) . So, theoretically, you can have a picture of 56.000 x 48.000 pixels. Thats the maximum on information you can store on a high resolution 6X7 negative. If you where ale to scan this with a very high resolution scanner , you would get a 2688 meg pixel file. Of course that is only a theoretical value, but in any way, it is much higher than a slr digital. I remember shooting the singapore skyline ( around 10 years ago) on 6X7 50 asa film for a german client who opened up an office in singapore. The negative was than scanned and printed on 6X7 meter Canvas , for the entrance of the german HQ. It looked absolutely stunning.

 

[Reportage]

why not compare with a 645D vs 1Ds MKIII review?

Pentax 645D Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III Comparison Digital SLR Review

"If I had to judge the cameras on image quality alone then the Pentax would be a clear winner. "

 

[sfoto100]

I didnt bcos I know the answer already. I am interested in film medium format hence the comparison.

But still tks for the info... Good when someone shares

 

[ricohflex]

The usual which is better crap. Who cares? Use BOTH.

Film vs. Digital

 

[sfoto100]

The usual which is better crap. Who cares? Use BOTH.

Film vs. Digital

Hahaha

U r my idol.

Ok I go buy rb67 now!