----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Is the New LX Going to Be a Digital
Camera
In a message dated 7/25/01 1:47:19 PM Eastern
Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<
Not too tough, I imagine a good scanner at it's
highest settings will put
out a file that big from the negative.
However, I doubt that doing a scan
at that higher resolution is going to gain much
when the neg was shot with
a disposable camera lens, or when the film is
the typical 400 or 800 ASA
they cram into those cameras. >>
My point? Small format digital images have to be
~drum~ scanned then
digitally interpolated to even get close to the
raw data in a well exposed 24
x 36 negative/slide, even it if is taken on
quality ISO 400/800 film.
Digital images don't have to be scanned at all.
The question? How large will the CMOS be on the
MZ-D? Larger than APS format,
but smaller than 24 x 36?
If you mean the as yet unamed digital MZ-S, it's
capture device is 24mmx36mm, and is a CCD.
I do have a question about film to digital
comparisons. What is the comparative image depth
of film to digital capture? I know the digital
guys talk about 36 bit depth, but how does that
tranlate to the capture depth of a long scale
film such as Portra?
Is 12 bits per colour the equivalent of 12 stops
of tonal range?
William Robb
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
