|
While on the subject of full frame and Canon/Nikon etc., I had the opportunity to
directly compare a Nikon D2X with a new Canon 1dS MkIII which I was intending
to buy. The D2x is a 12 MP and
the 1ds is a 20MP which, in the real world, means that in a given size print where
the 1ds gives me 300dpi, the D2x will only give me 240dpi (Real resolution neutralizes
the squared difference in numbers you get by using megapixel count) This means that the
individual photosite size on the 1ds is about the same as the D2X (around 0.007mm
square) I was shooting large
fine JPEGS because I had not yet downloaded the new PS RAW plugin. I was amazed & horrified
to see that the Nikon pics looked better. Less noisy, cleaner and better
tonality. But they were also
sharper/clearer with the subject the same size on the screen. At high magnification, the
Canon images looked like they'd been slightly over sharpened and had lost edge
integrity... Should I order myself a
D3??? Or, God forbid, a digital MamiyaRZ plus lenses? ]I had ordered a D3 but
cancelled in favor of a new 1Ds because I have some good Canon lenses and I
thought it would take me to where I didn’t need to buy medium format. (I
am competing against some top pros in With film there’s
scanning and Photoshopping etc., Any logical reason why
the Canon pics should be degraded compared to D2X? Herschel |
