Slashdot Mirror

A low end DSLR can beat 35mm film today. high end dslr's utterly kicks the crud out of 35mm in resolution.

The getting old Canon 5d Mark II is 21.5 megapixels which is 1.5 megapixels greater than the absolute best 35mm film+best camera+best lens can do. Honestly 90% of all 35mm film shots are less than 12megapixel in resolution due to low end glass and cameras as well as being processed less than perfect. And that's just the mid level stuff from Canon. high end digitals that reach the 60 megapixel mark utterly destroy 35mm film even when used with the best of everything.

That just goes to show how much you know, Canon's highest res pro camera is the 21.1 MP EOS-1Ds Mark III. Even Nikon's D3x only has a 24.5 MP sensor. If you want bigger ones you have to step up to medium format cameras such as Hasselblad or Mamiya.

Meanwhile in pro photographer Ken Rockwell's article Why We Love Film he writes:

"You want dynamic range? I got your dynamic range right here in this little canister. It's called film; a write-once, read-many (WORM) medium."

"I made this shot on a Contax G2 with a 21mm Zeiss lens at f/8 on Fuji Velvia 50, which was processed and scanned at the same time at NCPS. The dynamic range is so great that the hellacious sunbursts you see are just what's naturally coming off the diaphragm blade at f/8, as if 1,000 suns were shining in the lens in the two-minute exposure."

"Not only that, but the film I shot in a Canon EOS Rebel G film camera, worth about $20 today, was sharper as scanned at NCPS than the file I made with the same lens on a Canon 5D, which is sharper still than anything on earth from Nikon digital."

"How about that? A $20 camera with a $5 roll of film and $20 to process and scan the entire roll is sharper than a $5,000 camera. (The Contax cost more, but still loads less than anything in full-frame digital.)"

Falcon

I second this. I just bought my 2nd DNS 323 after the first one got full. (its cheaper to buy 2 DNS 323 which are 2 bays, compared to getting the 4 bay version). I shoot a lot of pics, and at 20-25 meg per RAW file, it adds up quickly. The first is stacked with 2x1.5 TB drives, the 2nd with 2x2TB drives.

I'd love to get the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III, I still have a film based EOS Rebel and lenses for it, which has a file size over 60 MB according to Canon. And though maybe not all the tyme I'm sure there will be tymes I'll want to save photos in raw as well as tiff and or jpeg. Eventually I'll also want to get a medium format camera body, perhaps a 645 like Mamiya's 645AFD III, with film and digital backs. I don't know when but I want to start a photography business.

Right now for mass storage I have 3 external HDDs, two I have here with me while the third can be stored off-site. Now what I'd like is wide area wireless broadband so when I'm out hiking I can upload my photos, I mostly do nature photography but I want to try astrophotography as well.

Falcon

Come on Pentax, Mamaiya, Rollie or somebody, please release an affordable digital medium format camera!

Get a medium format camera with a film back then scan your film. Then if you want one later you can get a digital back That's what I'm planning, if I get a medium format camera. Though I'll thought it would be nice to get a Mamiya RZ67 Pro IID when I do get a medium format it will probably be a used camera.

Falcon

http://www.mamiya.com/news-events-press-releases-new-mamiya-zd-digital-back-adapter-for-rb67-pro-spro-sd.html/

I would argue that the copyright duration should be dependent upon the amount of risk the creator or creators had to take on in order to create the work. Thus, a photograph's copyright might last only five years because it takes a fairly short amount of time to create it and the risk is thus relatively low.

You've never seen photos combat and wildlife photographers took have you? It doesn't matter what you're using to shoot in combat, using a camera can get you just as dead as shooting a rifle. And using a camera can decidedly be more dangerous than using a rifle to shoot wildlife.

Good cameras are also expensive. A Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III cost $8000. A Mamiya RZ67 Pro IID film camera cost at least $2000, a digital back for it will set you back several thousand dollars more.

You may be asking why a movie deserves less protection than a novel. Several reasons. First, having created both, I find that it's a lot harder to write a novel than to write a screenplay.

For others it's the opposite, it's easier for some to write novels than movies. Fact is is different types of writing are easier for some than for others. Robert Ludlum wrote 25 novels but only a few were made into movies, and the scripts for those were probably written by script writers.

Falcon

um, even RAW files are only 12 bit, jpeg is 8bit. what camera are you using that you need 32bit?

While many digital cameras use 12 bits per colour, some use 14 and a few use 16 according to an article in current edition, Jan/Feb 2007, of Digital Photo Pro . I'd bet more and more will use 16 bit colour depths with medium format digital backs having even more depth. I don't currently have a digital camera, but I'd like to get one like Canon's EOS 1Ds Mark II. I just read where it's colour bit depth is only 12 bits. However I also would like to get a medium format camera, perhaps a 645 maybe from Mamiya, a Hasselblad, or a Sigma.

if you need 16bit to accommodate the extra bits from your RAW files there is CinePaint (AKA filmGIMP).
CinePaint handles up to 32bit colour spaces.
http://www.cinepaint.org/ [cinepaint.org]

Thanks, I'll check it out.

I agree that there is nothing like PS, but for most people gimp works as well as PS. I recently mad the move from GIMP to PS Elements 4.0 (MAC) strictly for the RAW import so I understand where you are coming from, but that doesn't change that there are other packages that support higher bit colour spaces. Having never done a RAW conversion on a Linux machine I have no idea what you would use to import RAW files into CinePaint.

I'm not exactly the average person that uses cameras, in high school I took a class in photography learning how to use cameras and work in darkrooms. Because of this and I had a 35mm slr when I was in the army I was my unit's unoffical photographer. My commanding officer would give me film to shoot some photos whenever we went out into the field or when we were training. We had an arts and crafts center on post where I'd develop, make enlargements, of photos for those in my unit. Then in college I took photography as an elective. While it's been years since I have worked in a darkroom I plan on joining a local photography association, IFP Minnesota, that has photography classes and darkrooms members can use. I'm hoping they can help me work as a photographer, I'm on disability and don't work now. As for what OS I'll use, I'm typing this on a Windows PC, however because it's old I recently got a tower PC with Linux preinstalled and I'm getting a Macbook Pro for a laptop.

I wish I had the dough to buy CS2 (or CS3 when it's available) but Elements is all I can afford right now. I still use GIMP a lot because there are some things I'm used to in GIMP that I can't figure out how to do or even if they area possible in Elements. (layer mask for example)

I know what you mean, I wish I could afford CS3 myself. I'm hoping I'll be able to find work quickly as a photographer and can then afford it. However something I thought of which may help you if you want to get CS3, is to find and buy an older version of Photoshop. Around here a few tymes a year we have computer shows wherein booths sale older versions of software with prices dramatically lowered. Then Adobe sales upgrade versions for a lot less than full versions, between the costs of an old version and the new one, this may be cheaper than the full version. You may even be able to find old versions in some stores, though I haven't looked specifically for Photoshop but some of the stores around here have a bin or shelf with outdated software for sale at reduced prices.

Again, thanks for the info on Cinepaint, I'll see how well it works.

If their TVs' quality is like that of their cameras, I'd buy ANYTHING BUT a Sony.

Sony is a tv company, has made tvs for many years but has only recently entered the photography market I'd get a Sony tv if I liked the specs and the price but as far as cameras are concerned the only companies I'd get a camera from right now is either Canon or Mamiya.

Well sure sounds like that'll BLOW AWAY 35mm film and definitely be about comprable to 4x5 film.

Wow! 111 megapixel? The biggest 35mm equivilent sensor I know of is what Canon uses in the fullframe EOS Ds Mark I which is 16.7 mp. I know Mamiya makes a medium format, er 645 equivalent, camera but it only has 22 mp. It's the Mamiya ZD. The same with their ZD digital back. That sensor would feel more at home in a long format camera body though I would like to see it in a 645 digital back. And the article says it's 4X4 inchs, a lot bigger than 4X5 cm.

You can make the edits directly with the "levels" tool to adjust the white and black points. Save it, and the changes are permanent, and irreversible (well, unless you go back to the unedited original... you DID do "save as..." correct?).

Ok, first I don't recall having heard of layers in this way, then when I used to edit photographs I always edited a copy and kept the original as a backup. Actually when I turn in film for development I also order a cd, so I don't edit originals. The few tymes I've edited something that wasn't mine I'd either make a copy and edit the copy or I'd do a "save as" as soon as I opened it.

Layers are VERY powerful, and pro users make very extensive use of them. They're probably the single most important tool for the professional user, and were really the turning point in PHotoshop when they were introduced way back in version 2 or 3.

Though not a pro I would like to get into photography professionally, well get paid for it, which is why I'd like to get Photoshop. Something I hadn't thought of before I'd like to do, when taking my photography classes and in the photo labs on campus at the college I was attending, I'd heard of others who were printing books of their photos and I've come across some articles in photo magazines about how to do this using a computer system. I'd also like to get a full frame DSLR as well as a 645 medium format camera with both film and digital backs. When it came out I wanted to get Canon's 16.7 Megapixel EOS 1DS Mark II but was no where near being able to afford it's $8000 price tag. They've got a new full frame DSLR, EOS 5D with 12.8 MP for less than half. If I weren't planning on getting a new Powerbook I could manage that. So for now I'll just have to get by with my film based EOS Rebel. When I do get a DSLR though I want to be able to use the lenses I have now.

The one real stinky thing about them is they are full bitmaps. If you start with a 9 MB RAW file (say from a 20D)

Obviously I prefer the bigger sensors, higher pixel count, with a full frame. Like the EOS 1Ds Mark II. Mamiya has a new digital medium format, the Mamiya ZD with 22 MP. Boy am I drooling over it, but I'd really rather have a "regular" camera with both film and digital backs. Mind you, while to most people the larger pixel counts won't really make a difference, I love to make big enlargements, and would love to make some posters from photos of mine.

Though C41 may be the current process for color film as you say, it's been around for years, and isn't going away anytime soon. Personally I used to use C41 film but have been thinging of using E6, that's what we had to use in my photography classes. While it's possible to use the C41 process on E6 I've heard the result can be pretty funky.

i also feel sorry for people who have negatives that are not 35mm

What I have now is a Canon EOS Rebel but I'm hoping to get a 645, I'm leaning towards a Mamya, perhaps a Mamiya ZD as well as a digital back along with film backs.

Though C41 may be the current process for color film as you say, it's been around for years, and isn't going away anytime soon. Personally I used to use C41 film but have been thinging of using E6, that's what we had to use in my photography classes. While it's possible to use the C41 process on E6 I've heard the result can be pretty funky.

i also feel sorry for people who have negatives that are not 35mm

What I have now is a Canon EOS Rebel but I'm hoping to get a 645, I'm leaning towards a Mamya, perhaps a Mamiya ZD as well as a digital back along with film backs.

I have a Yashica medium, I hardly use it,

You may not find medium or large format film in most stores but then again you won't find these cameras in them either. I can get them in a shop near me though, NatCam or National camera Exchage. Have you seen Mamiya's medium format ZD? I'd rather get a 645 like Mamiya's AFD II or 645 AFD and get both a film and a digital back for it.

I have a Yashica medium, I hardly use it,

You may not find medium or large format film in most stores but then again you won't find these cameras in them either. I can get them in a shop near me though, NatCam or National camera Exchage. Have you seen Mamiya's medium format ZD? I'd rather get a 645 like Mamiya's AFD II or 645 AFD and get both a film and a digital back for it.

I have a Yashica medium, I hardly use it,

You may not find medium or large format film in most stores but then again you won't find these cameras in them either. I can get them in a shop near me though, NatCam or National camera Exchage. Have you seen Mamiya's medium format ZD? I'd rather get a 645 like Mamiya's AFD II or 645 AFD and get both a film and a digital back for it.

"Well, who doesn't have a digital capable TV nowadays anyhow? Luddites!".

I don't and I'm not a luddite. Then again I mostly watch movies and some CNN. I'd love to have a bnig screen HDTV but I can't afford it and if I could then I'd get more photography equipment, cameras such as Canon's 16 MP EOS 1Ds Mark II, Mamiya's 23 MP Mamiya ZD medium format digiatl camera, and a bunch of lenses for them. Then instead of watching a bunch of movies I'd be spending a lot of tyme out and about taking photos or in my darkroom developing film and making blowups..

[currently building a darkroom in the cellar its taking ages .. i HATE spiders]

Wish I could afford to build a darkroom downstairs, if money weren't a concern I'd setup a darkroom in a heart beat. It's just been too long since I worked in one, the last tyme I did was in 1983. As it is now I'm hoping to save enough money to get a new 17" Powerbook and beyond that a DSLR like the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II, yea right if I can't afford the money for a darkroom I can't afford $8,000 either, a medium format 645 camera, and some more lenses. Actually I read an article a few days ago about Mamiya's new "medium format" 22MP digital SLR Mamiya ZD. Drool!!!

i was completely analogue as a photoographer

All I've ever used are film cameras though as I said above I'd like to get a full frame DSLR and/or a medium format camera with both film and digital backs. Actually I like a full frame digital back for an SLR like Silicon Film makes, well they don't make full frame sensors but they do make digital sensors for film SLRs.

There always has been and always will be a split between Cannon users and Nikon users. It's like Ford trucks vs. Dodge trucks. Good luck trying to persuade the one camp to like the other.

As far as I'm concerned what counts is the price and what equipment will produce the results desired. Though I have a Canon camera and lenses now I would get a Nikon, Mamiya, or Sigma if it did what I want and I could afford it. Actually I've been thinking of getting a 645 from Mamiya, maybe the 645 AFD and later a digital back for it.