| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/15/2004 12:16:32 PM · #1 |
In case any of you are interested.
Comparison Testing
Personally, I found the following the most interesting:
"From these tests, it is my opinion that digital cameras will match Fujichrome Velvi 35mm film when they reach more than about 10 megapixels. Somewhere in the 12-16 megapixels will produce color image quality comparable to 35 mm film (this is a compromise of more intensity detail and less color detail than film). Somewhat fewer megapixels, approximately 8-10 Mpixels will match 35mm film intensity detail but at below 35mm film color detail.
"Medium format film: about 50 digital camera megapixels are need to match Fujichrome Velvia in 6 x 4.5 cm.
"Large format: more than 200 digital camera megapixels are need to match 4x5 Fujichrome Velvia film. How much more needs futher testing."
Message edited by author 2004-01-15 12:27:41. |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 12:49:26 PM · #2 |
| Guess it depends on who you want to believe. this guy's testing shows that "The 10D 6mp camera image quality approaches and in some cases may equal or exceed Provia F film scan quality at 4000 dpi" and "the Canon 1Ds 11mp DSLR exceeds 4000dpi 35mm film scan quality by a considerable amount. In fact, in some photographic situations 1Ds image quality may be competitive with a 4X5 camera image when the 4X5 chrome is scanned with a fixed focus scanner like the Epson 2450." See for example, this page that compares the 10D, 1Ds and Provia F ISO 100 scanned with a Nikon film scanner at 4000dpi. |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 01:03:17 PM · #3 |
| So here's my dilema on this subject. I have recently switched to shooting almost everything with the 1Ds, except for my cityscape shots. I use anywhere from 5 -12 min exposures. So I use my pentax 67 and velvia. Has anybody experimented with very long exposures and digital? The last time I did the noise was terrible... |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 01:05:11 PM · #4 |
| Also, Color detail has more to do with bit depth than megapixels...anything 16 bit and above will equal what the human eye sees. |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 01:15:30 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by MeThoS:
So here's my dilema on this subject. I have recently switched to shooting almost everything with the 1Ds, except for my cityscape shots. I use anywhere from 5 -12 min exposures. So I use my pentax 67 and velvia. Has anybody experimented with very long exposures and digital? The last time I did the noise was terrible... |
With a canonD60 I get reasonably acceptable night shots up to about 5 minutes before its swamped in sensor supply noise and general thermal noise. I've heard that D10 can do slightly better.
some D60 trials //www.pbase.com/gordonmcgregor/360bridge the EXIF gives the exposure times.
Liquid cooling is a very popular option for astro-digital photography with long exposures and low noise - I wonder when Canon will switch to that :)
Message edited by author 2004-01-15 13:16:00. |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 01:39:27 PM · #6 |
Here is another MF vs 1Ds test:
//www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml
"Goodbye film. Goodbye medium format."
and:
//www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field-5.shtml
That's from the same guy that now uses a 16mp Kodak Pro back for his MF camera.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2004 02:30:38 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by MeThoS:
Has anybody experimented with very long exposures and digital? |
This might not be right for you, but image stacking might help (there's a gallery of stacked images too. |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 02:50:34 PM · #8 |
| We'll see how it works. I'm only taking my 1Ds to Key West this weekend. I'll post some photos if they turn out. ;D |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 04:00:00 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by dwoolridge:
Originally posted by MeThoS:
Has anybody experimented with very long exposures and digital? |
This might not be right for you, but image stacking might help (there's a gallery of stacked images too. |
Image stacking does wonders for random noise. the amont of this type of noise is reduced by the square root of the number of exposures, e.g. averaging four exposures gives a 2x reuction.
For an additional noise reduction opportunity, perform dark frame subtraction to reduce fixed pattern noise. the combination yields awesome results.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2004 05:26:36 PM · #10 |
MWAHAHAHAHA -- knew I could get you guys to do some research for me. *grin*
Course, nobody on here is gonna find any articles that say that film is better, so I guess only half my research is done. ;-)
In all seriousness, thanks for the links to the articles folks. |
|
|
|
01/15/2004 06:22:29 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Patella:
MWAHAHAHAHA -- knew I could get you guys to do some research for me. *grin*
Course, nobody on here is gonna find any articles that say that film is better, so I guess only half my research is done. ;-)
In all seriousness, thanks for the links to the articles folks. |
I'd love to find some comparisions on colour quality too - digital is becoming increasingly cartoony to my eye - I suspect this is partly due to too accurate representation of the scene, compared to the vagaries of film
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/09/2025 05:06:25 AM EDT.
