bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> I guess, given the nature of the competition in the landscape photography
> activity here, what I'd really like is a digital camera that can match the
> Pentax 6x7 or one of the Linhof Technoramas using a fine-grained film, for
> detail.
>
> Does such a beast exist?
>
At the risk of setting off another olio from Ken of information and
reports from experience relevant to some aspects of landscape
photography, but not to the specific question asked, semi-religious
rants and paranoid sounding responses to perceived calumnies aimed at
inanimate objects but emotionally responded to as though aimed at
himself, I will attempt an informative answer.
====> As regards resolution of detail, and ONLY in that regard: <====
Michael Reichmann and friends did a pretty decent comparison of digital
and film from high end FF DSLRs through MF film and backs to 4x5 film.
<http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/back-testing.shtml>
Like any such comparison made in the real world with time and cost
constraints, it has its flaws. It is on the other hand unique as far as
I know in the range of cameras, film, and sensor sizes involved. The
focal distance is too short to definitively apply to landscape work, but
as the test is about film/sensor ability to resolve detail, I don't
think that matters.
It's already out of date and only includes Canon cameras in the DLSR
category. However Canon is still the only serious contender in this
category to date and reasonable assumptions may be made from the examples.
Looking at the 12.7 MP 5D, 16.6 MP 1DsII and 22 MP Phase One P25, I
think one may get a pretty good idea where the 5DII will fall. My
personal guess, based on the improvements Canon has been making in pixel
level resolution, is that the 21 MP 5D will fall about with the P30, if
not the P45, considerably better than the 645 film, slightly better than
the 4x5 film, perhaps slightly behind the P45 and certainly behind the
4x5 scanning back.
I haven't mentioned the 1DsIII for a couple of simple reasons. It's the
same nominal resolution as the 5D and much more expensive. It's sensor
system is now one design cycle behind the 5D.
---------
Ignoring the reported problems with vibration of the Pentax, I expect
the 5DII to meet or exceed any results from 6x7 film. I wouldn't expect
crops from it to match fine grain film in a Technorama. However, it
would require a huge print to make the difference visible.
All this pixel peeping is all very entertaining, but it's useful to keep
some perspective. At what size will the actual full images be presented?
These cameras are out at the point where images over a metre wide might
be necessary to see the differences. An E-3 will significantly exceed
what you are getting with the E-1 a 5D far exceed it and a 5DII will
blow you mind when you first view the images with a good lens full size.
It will also put you in the running with your competitive landscapers in
detail resolved, if not always in money spent and sheer physical
impressiveness of equipment.
To take full advantage of this kind of sensor resolution, you will need
to spend some money on good lenses, but you already knew that. :-)
As to the Technorama, consider doing four shot panoramas and I think you
will be there.
As I recall, you have been struggling along with already inadequate
computer horsepower, Have you budgeted for a real image processing machine?
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|