Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/11/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Frank Dernie wrote: > > I would expect the performance to be limited by the sensor size - it > has the really minute one about 4x6mm half the size of my little > fingernail, probably to keep cost and size down. IME the size of the > sensor is as important in digital cameras as in film for overall > quality. > cheers > Frank > ><Snip> We've seen these pictures of a photographer on a bluff with a view camera and a 4x5 digital back back to fit it and a laptop and we assume they are getting better images than we are. But why are the Hasselblads being dropped like lemmings going over the cliff filling up the used glass cases in the camera stores? "My digital photography with my Nikon/Canon body is so good anyway!" they all say. Would it be even better if it was "medium format' digital photography I've got to ask. Would the law of bigger the better film/sensor acrerage not exist between the 35mm sensor sizes and the medium format sensor sizes? Like it does with film? I'm sure it does and am looking forward to doing some "medium format" digital photography and plan on holding on to my Hasselblads. The old fashioned square kind made by Swedes mainly. With those inconsequential Zeiss lenses. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabinergroup.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html