If you research this issue and dig deep, several things come to light. I will not bother the list; if important, you will seek. Or make a few tests. What immediately strikes me is the amount of mis-information. Search "film Vs. digital" or "resolution, 8x10 film Vs digital" and you will read many opinions and a variety of "facts." Some sites say one thing, some say something else. Resolution charts and the math is all over the place. Could it be that for most people, what they get is simply good enough? After all, you cannot expect the typical user to know much about film, resolution, and the like. Can you? If what they get is good enough, what will drive the manufacturers to make a top quality camera? Not much. Here is a quote: "For serious things I use film, although digital is getting so good and it's so much easier to use I'm getting lazy and shooting less film. I print magnificent 12 x 18" prints at Costco for $2.99 from my digicams all the time. " What does that statement mean? Does this person know that the fine quality he sees is perhaps not as good as it would have been if he used a large format camera and a decent lab? Does it really matter? He goes on ..."In 1940 normal people got fuzzy snaps from their Brownies and flashbulbs while artists got incredible results on 8 x 10" film. Today artists still mess with 4 x 5" cameras and normal people are getting the best photos they ever have on 3 MP digital cameras printed at the local photo lab." Apparently, this photo "expert" never saw my father's Brownie pictures. I will put my Bessa Rangefinder up against any 3mp digital camera; for that matter, I'll put my Retina "C" up against most current 35mm cameras. Or my 126 Instamatic Reflex, for that matter. Another thread, perhaps. As for "normal people are getting the best photos they ever have on 3 MP digital cameras printed at the local photo lab," perhaps this is true. Finally, this gem: "Digital cameras give much better results than 35mm print film unless you are custom printing your own film because the colors from digital are not subject to the whims of the lab doing the printing." I doubt this person knows much about 35mm. George Tice once provided Kodak with a 35mm Kodachrome and it became a Colorama in Grand Central Station. This person is not likely to produce a digital image as good or capable of that degree of enlargement. Actually, I own a dealer version of that image and it is sharp. So the endless battle goes on. No one knows much and the truth is often hard to ferret out from under the web pile of web rubble. Bob ... Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com |
