Mark Roberts wrote:
Joaquim Carvalho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you try to compare film and digital by counting pixels, you have a
life of confusion and misery ahead of you.
I'm not trying to compare them, I only mean that so that you could even
think of making a comparison between the film used on that picture and a
CCD you would need a CCD with at least 648 Mega pixels
No you wouldn't. That's the point of the article.
Don't you agree that there's a lot more information on that medium
format picture than what could be captured by any CCD?
What article? This thread started by someone saying he was happy with
his new 645 then someone else said "film is dead", I replied I envy the
guy that bought the 645, I'd like to have one, medium format pictures
capture a lot of detail, a lot more than any CCD I know of does, that's
one reason why you can't compare medium format film to the sub 35mm CCD
that I have on my *ist DS
