On 24 Nov 2004 at 22:08, Jon Glass wrote: > On Nov 24, 2004, at 5:41 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: > > > Hmm, pics or comments didn't do too much for me, again a strange > > comparison. If > > it shows me anything it is that the 200/4 for the P67 is a pretty poor > > performer, CA is really pronounced. > > > That's funny, because I thought the 4000 ppi scan on the Nikon made the > up-rezed 1DS image look pretty sad in comparison. However, as somebody > said--apples to oranges. Interesting to look at, but . . .
Sharpness wise the 67 scan looks better but it was a sub-optimal scan using a mediocre lens so it's hardly a decent match with Canons top DSLR and one of their best macro lenses. If a decent 67 camera/lens and scan were made the difference would have been far more obvious. My LS-8000 can't resolve the detail visible in my 67 films. 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
