I never said that 4x5 film cameras and the current DSLRs are both best suited the exact same applications, they are not. i.e 4x5 is much much better for landscape and DSLR is much much better for sports/action.
How many photographers here even DO sports/action? I bet it isnt as high as landscape. Secondly, the much higher image sharpness in the capture allows the photographer MUCH more artisitic latitude in cropping after the fact while still maintaining acceptable final print sharpness. Thirdly the 4x5 cameras are much more adjustable geometrically which allows for complete control of geometric distortion and focus plane control that you don't generally get with 35mm/DSLRs. And finally, The image sharpness and absolute print size DOES MATTER. When you have a really good shot, the bigger you can print it while still maintaining "you are there" clarity is NOT something trivial. Quite the contrary. Sharpness can never ruin a photo, softness can. JCO -----Original Message----- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 8:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: It's over (was Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers) On 25 Aug 2004 at 20:44, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > No, > > Cant Take away the cost issue, because it is possible to match 4x5 > film quality with special digital backs that cost $10,000 and up. Can > you afford that? I doubt. Herein lies your problem. > So IN THE AFFORDABLE domain, > 4x5 film blows away digital..... Maybe for yourself and you still don't seem to be taking into account the relatively limited scope of 4x5 equipment. Sharpness and absolute print size isn't all that makes a photograph. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
