Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Rob Appleby writes: > The digital file examples posted in the review are extremely clean - I doubt > such results are possible from film scans. No doubt the lack of noise means > they can be manipulated and enlarged far better than scans. > > Whether the claim is bullshit or not, the examples are pretty convincing. > Looks like one hell of a camera, although priced beyond my reach for my > present needs. > > -- Rob > Rob, Technical things are not my strong suit, but I think those Canon digital images look TOO sharp. This reminds me of the war that has been going on in the cinema world for two decades between film and video. Film is still winning. And one big reason is that video looks too sharp. If you are going to the theater to see a movie, who wants to have the feeling you are watching a CNN newscast. About three years ago ABC Network invited me (along with other magazine editors) to screen the latest Hi-Def Digital technology on a 60" Plasma screen. It hurt my eyes it was so sharp, it was un-watchable. About two years ago another company invited me to a screening where 30 directors of photography were going to evaluate some Hi-Def tests that had been transferred to 35mm film (at E-Film in Burbank, the leader in this field) and then screened on a large theater screen. The result from the DPs?...it looks NICE but still NOT film. Anyway, this debate will go on for years with no clear winner. sl >> >> > This was posted earlier but anyone interested in digital should >> > re-read this >> > article, >> > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml >> > >> > Pay attention to the comparison to film. You will notice that this 11MP >> > camera is resolving more than film with the 70-200L lens. >> - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html