"J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > NOT TRUE, > > Even the best 35mm film is only about 200 lp/mm. > > Even using an excellent lens of 200 lp/mm results > in a film/lens combination of only 100 lp/mm.
Huh? Two times excellent equals only 1/2 of excellent? In the first place, where, pray tell, would you GET this so-called "excellent lens," capable of resolving 200 line pairs per mm? I know of no consumer level lens capable of that level of resolution. Understand, JC, I'm not calling you out. I really want to know! > The film DOES affect the result, even the best films.... > JCO Of course, you're right. I agree, but the question remains. If you can find a film that consistently delivers a resolution of 200 lp/mm, what are you going to use to impress an image on a frame or two? No, I mean a lens available to the average photographer? Even a rich professional photographer? keith whaley
