Why do we have 4000dpi scanners then? THere is noticable difference between a scan with 2400 dpi and 4000dpi... Also, do not forget that you have to account for all three of R,G and B.
-e > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Quack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: EOS 1d compared to scanned film > > > > Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:24:55 +0100 > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: EOS 1d compared to scanned film > > > > Does anyone know of a comparison between a 1d and > > a scanned image from film? > > Modern colour negative film resolves around 100 line > pairs per mm image height, which boils down to the > equivalent of 34 megapixels. > > Which is not what you get, because very many lenses > even high end primes do not resolve more than 50 line > pairs, which is equivalent to 9 megapixels. > > Cheap zoom lenses even only resolve 30 line pairs > per mm, which would be 3 megapixels. > > Note: These are real megapixels. Calculating up and > down interpolation success and loss, a 3 megpixel > camera will resolve the equivalent of slightly over > 2 megapixels (two thirds) as a rule of thumb. > > So, the EOS-1D is approximately what you get from > state of the art colour negative film in combination > to consumer class zoom lenses. > > The above calculations are taken from the current > issue of c't magazine, Germany's most reputated > computer magazine, which lately shows excellent > expertise in photography. > > -- > Michael Quack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
