>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/04/01 02:03PM >>>
>
> 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]>
>Hi Michael,
>If what you are saying is true, then why do 200MB drum scans look better
>han 50MB drum scans? Why is it easy to see such a large improvement in
>mage quality with a simple change to higher resolution film with better
>contrast and finer grain?
>The only conclusion I can come to is that lenses are not the limiting factor
>in image resolution, film is.
The resolution of an image is not the minimum of the lens and film/CCD/CMOS
resolutions.
A generally accepted rule-of-thumb formula for resolution is
1/R = 1/( (1/r_l) + (1/r_f) )
where R is resolution of the lens/film system, r_l the lens resolution, and r_f the
film resolution.
e.g. with a 100 lpm film and 50 lpm, the image resolution ~33 lpm.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
