This is why I have a hard time taking the Film is still better crowd seriously. For this test, this guy compared a 7 year old, mid level, crop sensor dSLR to medium format (and 35mm and bizarrely, a Galaxy S3). He edits the files with Elements 6 (!!!! also seven years old) and noise ninja (which if it runs in E6, cant be a recent version). So, seven year old mid level gear is competitive with Medium format film (professionally scanned on $50k scanner, Ill add). What does anyone think a full frame D810 or A7r or even my lowly 6D, all with a couple of tech generations of improvement, coupled with the same improvement cycle in software is going to do. Much less a PhaseOne. Its a matter of choice and opinion to like the way film looks. Its a matter of convenience to like the way film renders colors out of the box with out having to work at it. But but its a fact that digital has a huge advantage in resolving power/mm2 and sensitivity. Modern 35mm lenses are hugely better than decades old MF glass (again, its a matter of taste which ones you like the look of, thats not the point here). The author admits that the MF camera is much harder to use and limited in its abilities (compared to 7 year old tech). If you enjoy the process of using old things (and I can agree with that) its fine, the results dont really matter. But if the purpose is to make images, why use less capable equipment. And if you choose to, be honest and say its because you enjoy the process, dont try to deny the facts and claim its better. petapixel/2014/11/03/a-film-vs-digital-study-by-john-kossik/#more-150176 PS, the comments are golden
Posted on: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 21:25:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015