Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well, duh. Could it be that the latter site is matching a 4x5 camera against an ancient (by digital standards) Nikon D100 that has CCD (and thus more noise at high speeds) than the CMOS chips Canons have? On the other site, I didn't see any mention of a digital vs film debate. Eric Carlsbad, CA A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen, philosophers, and divines. - Ralph Waldo Emerson On Feb 1, 2004, at 11:21 PM, sam wrote: > The notion of "image quality" does not concern me too much because I > frequently soften images on purpose for effect, or softening happens > as part of the process (e.g., enlarging slides onto sheet film to make > image size negatives), but I have read the ongoing film vs digital > debate. Below are two sites that appear to have reasonable > information. Both conclude that film produces better (if by "better" > one means finer grain and resolution) image quality than digital. I'm > I missing something? Is there something these guys are missing? > > <http://photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html? > tripods.html~mainFrame> > > <http://www.butterflydesigns.net/tests/film_digital.htm> > > > Sam S > > > > -- > 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