chasfs wrote:
> I agree that there is about a 3:1 differential in real world
> usability.
> So you might need 30 megapixels to gets results similar to 6x7.
I would not argue with that number, assuming you are using a decent film
and scanner.
> That said, we should keep in mind that the DSLRs do in camera
> processing - sharpening, white balance adjustment, etc.
> Scanning film gives us the op****tunity to do the same types of
> correction. Most of the scanned film images on the web are
> "raw", but I'm including post processing in the 3:1 figure above.
>
> If you really need 110 MP, you can always stitch together 3 or 4
> 6x7 images.
And of course the point was not that one needs 110 MP, the point was
that you only need 20-30 MP to match 6x7 film. For most people 20-30 MP
will be enough, whether they are shooting film or digital. But if you
were to believe that you need 110 MP to match MF then you would also
have to believe that you would need something like 25 MP just to match
35mm film, which is clearly nonsense.
Scott
|
