I'll go so far as to say that shooting a high rez JPEG and making a print from it without further sharpening, will yield an acceptably sharp 5x7 or even 8x10 print. I'm basing this on turning down the standard sharpness on my Sony digicam one notch, shooting the highest rez JPEG or TIFF, and making a straight print from a consumer 1 hour lab. For the average shooter, and for most situations, the results are quite good. For more ambitious manipulation and for more detailed work, some massaging in PS may be beneficial. I'd say this: before judging sharpness on a computer screen, take the images and get a print made. Then judge the sharpness, or any other aspect of the image.
Shel > [Original Message] > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > My film was Portra 160VC for most jobs. The best scans I obtained were from a custom lab. They were drum scans and yielded full frame images of around 80 megs. I prepped them in PS the same way I prep my digital images today and printed them on the same Epson 2200 printer. The lens was the SMC 50/1.4. Of course, this wasn't a strict test. The subjects were different and, as you note, the fov was different. But to my eye, the prints from the *istD look better. A more scientific test would be interesting. In any case, I was merely making the point that there is no "softness" problem with the *istD when one shoots RAW and manages it properly.
