You can calculate all you want and even pixel peep, but in the end most people will "see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear" or in other words: people's opinions are highly subjective in spite of promoting various scientific "proofs" to support their subconscious bias. Or to put it more simple: take every bit advise with a grain of salt.
For the comparison you suggest, the anecdotal evidence is overwhelming: a 4x5 neg, properly exposed and properly scanned and properly printed will produce excellent 30"x40" prints.
The same cannot be said of a 12mp digital camera.
So while I might agree that a 12mp camera and a 4x5 can produce comparable-looking 16x20's, when it comes to much bigger prints, film still has quite an edge.
Michael
P.S. Nyquist calculation suggests that the maximum system detail extracted from a full-frame sensor can be no more than 16Mp -- so what does that tell you about the new 24mp cameras being promoted today?
-----Original Message-----
From: dmoore [mailto:dmoore007@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, December 6, 2008 11:51 AM
To: 'List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students'
Subject:Hello all, Let me re introduce myself since I've been a way from Photoforum for awhile. My name is Dave Moore, I live in Syracuse, NY, teach photography at Le Moyne College, and am also a commercial photographer and even make art sometimes when my schedule permits. I am planning to start taking some black and white landscapes, and I am deciding between two cameras: a 12MP Canon DSLR, or my 4x5 Graflex. I'm planning on making quite large prints, 20x24", and image quality is my main concern. I have 3 questions here: 1. dynamic range: I'm doubtful that the dynamic range of my DSLR files, even when shooting in Raw, can compare to black and white film. Any thoughts here? 2. image resolution: I'm also doubtful that the tiny little image sensor on a DSLR, even if it was a full frame DSLR which mine isn't, can compare in resolution to the 20 sq inches of image surface I get with 4x5, when enlarged to 20x24", or larger. 3. If shooting with 4x5, I plan to scan the negatives and print digitally. If I choose an output resolution of, say, 200PPI, does that neutralize any resolution advantage that 4x5 film would have over a high resolution digital file? I'm leaning heavily towards shooting 4x5 but before I do, I want to make sure that the loss of ease of use of a DSLR is really worth it, in terms of final print quality. Your thoughts and reactions here are very welcome. Thanks. Dave
