I haven't done any formal experimenting but I shoot with both the K1 and
Mz-S and swap lenses between them. Still very actively shooting B&W 35mm
film.
I don't know how meaningful a comparison between the two formats can be
- the degree of clarity, resolution and detail in k1 images is beyond
anything that 35mm film can produce. But the K1 can't produce the images
with the truly analog and organic feel of film. (Though it can be
simulated and imitated). In terms of technical quality, there was a time
when 35mm slide film could rival DSLR output, but that ended when DSLRs
hit 10 megapixels or more. I'm planning to compare 6x7 landscapes to
what the K1 produces, but expect that the K1 will produce a sharper,
clearer and more detailed image. I never did formal tests with the K-3
but it was close. Up till the K1 I honestly felt that a good 6x7 scan
could technically rival even a K3 image, but I doubt that is the case
with the K1.
WRT to lenses - I only have 4 full frame "digital" lenses, the Tamron
28-75, DFA 28-105, and DFA 50 and 100 macros. The macros, hands down,
are the best macros I've ever used in their respective focal lengths.
That holds true on both film and digital. The Tamron is great on both
film and digital. On the Mz-S it is by far the best normal zoom I've
ever used on a film body. My impression is that optimizing a lens for
digital sensors improves performance on film as well.
Legacy lenses are a mixed bag. Some that are superb on film and equally
good on the K1. Others that are good on film show flaws on the K1. Some
lenses that were good in the APS-C format are not so good on the K1
since the outer portion of the frame shows more distortion. I have a
SIgma 135-400 that was a very decent zoo lens on the K5 and K3, but is
not very good on the K1 (unless its in crop mode).
The thing with legacy glass - I don't think that there are ever legacy
lenses that were mediocre on film that are good on digital. But there
are plenty that were good on film but mediocre on digital. And also
plenty that were good on film and good on digital.
Mark
On 3/27/2017 1:04 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
The whole time I've been shooting with dslrs an inevitable topic of
conversation has been comparison with film. I just realized, someone
could go out with a tripod, a K-1, and one or more film bodies, and
take each shot, with the same lens and get a direct comparison. They
could not only shoot at the same ISO, shutter speed, and aperture, but
they could also set adjust the settings on the K-1 to whatever they
felt was the best use of the camera's abilities. There are several
things I'm curious about:
differences of legacy glass on film vs digital
differences of modern glass on film vs digital
Apart from any difference in the technical quality of the images, what
about differences in the artistic quality of the images.
I don't think I even have a film body that will work with some of the
new glass, so my current lack of time to do anything like this is
pretty much moot. Although a set of comparisons like this might make
for a really fun PDML photo expedition.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
