On 2013-06-13 13:05, Jan Faul wrote: > > On Jun 13, 2013, at 1:53 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> >> So, by my standards, digital has been clearly higher quality than film >> since at least 2003. > > > You are overstating the case for ‘affordable’ digital - perhaps a PhaseOne 80MP back competes ($45k), but not anything made by Nikon or Canon. And gigapixel? If you have any time constraints during a shot, it is useless. I'm stating the results as I see them, and as lots of other people see them. My Fuji S2 blew the socks off 35mm film for any use except OTF flash automation. Everything since then has been better and better; my D700 leaves 35mm film so far in the dust you can hardly see it from here. Stitching certainly has constraints, just as large-format cameras do, or rotating-lens panoramic cameras for that matter. Multi-pop studio flash techniques don't work with moving subjects either, but were still useful quite a lot. And you can get things like moving water remarkably successfully with stitching, so it's not totally limited to static subjects. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
