Johnny Johnson wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> If you're accustomed to judging quality by examining transparencies
> for resolution/sharpness under a 20x microscope I'm afraid that you
> might well be disappointed with the output from a 5D. Under
> controlled conditions (tripod, MLU, cable release) you can get at
> least 80 lpmm with Velvia whereas the 5D will top out at around 60-65
> lpmm. The 5D file will be clean though and will print nicely.
>
Michael Reichmann's digital vs. film comparisons have been
controversial, but I still find them worth reading, as he posts useful
samples.
He also believes what he finds."The 1Ds surpassed my Pentax 645nii
system by a considerable margin and so this was sold shortly after I
took delivery of my own 1Ds in November, 2002." For a pro who still
depends largely on sales of his images, that's significant. Here's the
initial comparison of the 11mp 1Ds and the Pentax 645
<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml>.
Later, he did a comparison of the 1Ds and the Pentax 67II. His
conclusion was that the 1Ds is sharper on 13x19 prints. He has a good
deal more to say that you may or may not agree with, but look for
yourself <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml>.
Of course the 11 mp 1Ds he used has been replaced with the 16 mp 1DsII
and you are looking at the 12 mp 5D. My guess, based on the times the
camera bodies came out, and my comparisons of the pixel level sharpness
of the 300D vs. the 5D, is that the 5D probably resolves more detail
than did the original 1Ds, but I could be wrong. In any case, it's
likely not to be less.
The 5D clearly beats film scanned on my 4000 dpi scanner.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|