Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 23:18:33 -0700
From: Jan Steinman <Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [OM] Re: Oly E-1
Well, Jan, before you pass summary judgement, maybe you should read the
article. What was compared were two shots made by a respected working pro in a
studio for a 2 page catalog spread. Image quality was *critical.* The 4X5
wasn't used handheld with grainy film. Give the author some credit. The 4X5 was
professionally scanned on a drum scanner. The shot was also taken with the 1Ds.
Professionally printed proofs were made from the drum scan and the RAW image
straight from the 1Ds. When his professional printer came by to show him the
proofs, the printer, who sees *everything* in the way of high end image
production, asked him, "What did you take these with?". When Abend replied with
the 1Ds, the printer said, "Well, they're *wonderful!* Jay Abend had a no. of
professionals compare the quality of the two, and while each had strengths and
weaknesses, overall Jay and the pros that looked at the proofs all preferred
the images from the 1Ds.
>I don't believe it. I have not read the article, but I'm certain >there is
>some caveat or condition in there, such as "1D on a tripod >surpasses
>hand-held 4x5 with fast grainy film and a >telephoto."
Read the article.
>According to the analyses I've seen, a good 4x5 can have >as much as 500
>megapixel's worth of information.
There's more to image quality than the no. of pixels. Anyone who has worked
with a digital SLR for any length of time will tell you this.
When CH says he can make a 100 inch print from his 10D, I am I inclined to
believe him. We (D&W Images ) routinely make 30X40" prints from PIctopia on
Fuji Crystal Archive shot with a 1D (4.08 megapixels) shot as a JPEG with a
Large/Coarse setting. You would be very impressed with the print quality.
-Stephen Scharf
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|