Previous Home Next

Digital versus film: some opinions

Ken Rockwell (http://kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm):

If you do fret the pixel counts, I find that it takes about 25 megapixels to simulate 35mm film's practical resolution, which is still far more than any practical digital camera. At the 6 megapixel level digital gives about the same sharpness as a duplicate slide, which is plenty for most things.

Norman Koren (http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html):

The 10D has about 80% of the resolution of 35mm film in both the simulations and my tests. But resolution isn't the only factor that contributes to image quality. Noise (the counterpart of grain in digital cameras) is nearly absent in the 10D.

Michael Reichmann (http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml):

What does this all mean? Here's what I see on prints, not just on the JPGs that I've created for this page, but real-world 11X17" and 13X19" prints made on an Epson 2200. In any print size up to 13X19" (Super A3), prints made from the 1Ds are sharper and have less grain than those from 35mm or 645 film scans. There is no area in which 35mm film scans are superior, and the 645 scan is only superior in terms of its ability to make prints larger than 13X19".

Robert Harrington: I think Norman has it about right.

Juvenile Snowy Egret

 Pluses and Minuses of Digital SLRs            © Robert Harrington 2004