Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/11/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for your input Phong. If you ever get to the Chicago area I'd be more than happy to look at your pics. Sam Krneta - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Phong Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 7:45 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital back for Leica lenses Sam, and others interested in digital, Austin and Jim Brick are the resident experts on digital imaging technology. I learn quite a few things from their posts on the subject, though I have been wondering about Jim's relatively low presence. Then just a short while ago, someone posted that he is actively on "something digital that would be of great interest to photographers", the nature of which he cannot divulge yet (misquote entirely mine). From my limited though serious practical experience with digital photography, I affirm that the equation of megapixel numbers versus film is incomplete. You really need to bring the medium and size of the final output into the equation. Even then, the equation is still very incomplete. There are applications where digital would be a poor choice, pixel resolution not withstanding. In my case, with my equipment (current Leica and Canon on film, vs. Canon 3 Mpixel digital SLR), I have learned to avoid digital if possible when I want some highlight details, when I want certain B&W look, when I need to shoot at high ISO, especially in low-light, when I want long exposures (say 5 seconds or longer), especially in low-light, when I want to use low ISO (which means 50 these days), when I want slides, when I know for sure I want prints 11x14 or larger. That looks like a long list, but account for less than 25% of my photography in the last 12 months. Even at 3 Mpixels, print size 8x12 or smaller, I do not decide 35mm film vs. digital based on image quality, or resolution. I would use medium format or 4x5 for that. My best digital prints equal my best film prints. And my worst prints, well you don't want to look at them anyway. I would be more than happy to show my digital prints to any Luggers in the Boston or Montreal areas (or Austin, or Bucharest, or NYC, or Reading, PA, which I visit several times a year) In fact, if I ever meet you, I will insist :-) And I am very happy now that I can use my Leica R lens with a digital camera: http://www.pbase.com/image/7255136 - - Phong > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Sam Krneta > > Austin, > ... > Does that mean that we are nearing a threshold in CCD development as it > relates to size, using today's format benchmarks? At what resolution > would the laws of physics start working against the 35mm format? Or at > least the use of that format as a benchmark? Are we ever going to see 40 > megapixel CCDs based on the 35mm format? I once read that digital had to > get to 40 megapixel to equal some of the finer grained 35mm films, mind > you I read that quite a while ago, when we were still being amazed by 2 > megapixel cameras. Personally based on the quality I've seen using my 4, > 5, and 6 megapixel cameras I'd guess that at 20 most film would have a > hard time competing. > ... > BTW: How do you know so much about digital? Any good websites for > someone to learn the basics, something like a CCD Design 101? > ... - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html