Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi George, Sorry, I can't resist... > "As any high end digital back user will know,the quality of > the image off > of a professional back far exceeds that of film. Far better dynamic > range, better colour fidelity and better sharpness, Dynamic range is not necessarily better in all circumstances. You can get comparable dynamic range from film, you just have to know how...and you also have to know how with digital too. It just doesn't come automatically. Color fidelity is dubious. You can adjust the color fidelity of film same as you can digital, so I don't see how that claim holds. As far as sharpness goes, yes, digital can be perceived as being much sharper, but is that reality? I think the eye/mind/untrained eye perceives sharpness with loss of detail better than something that isn't as sharp (though possibly more true to life BTW) but has higher detail. It's like looking at lithographs...they have high sharpness, but no detail. > especially when using > dedicated digital lenses. I've been designing this stuff for over 25 years, and I've never heard of a "dedicated digital lense". There are lenses that are designed to match the MTF to the sensor pitch, but whether that really improves things or not has yet to be demonstrated... I've tested both high end lenses, and supposed "digital" lenses...and have not seen any advantage, with the same sensor...and be aware, that the specific lense has to be matched to the sensor, which means that it's only good for THAT sensor, not for one with a higher pitch or lower pitch... > Also bear in mind that film is effectively going through two lens > systems,that of the camera and that of the scanner." That may or may not have any effect. It's a tough job educating the world, but hey, someone has to do it ;-) Austin - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html