I kept getting the feeling that the focus was off on the film scans. Unfortunately the epson holder leaves something to be desired and the lack of focus control can be a problem if the 3200 is at all like my 2400. I read about some people testing the focus by shimming the holder as well as putting the negative directly on the glass. The results varied and some were able to achieve better results through testing. Since film does and will curl however a film scanner without variable focus is very limited IMHO. I think that's one of the reasons I started noticing so much more dust on my negatives since I went with the low priced Minolta DualScan III. I don't think using 6600 interpolated vs. the actual 3200 res of the scanner helps a lot of the time though either. Going higher then 2400dpi on my Epson 2400 actually created a visible distortion in some images. Unfortunately and unavoidable for the most part Jpeg images for the web also cause distortion.
The proof truly is in the printing. Making yourself contact sheets comparing small crops and giving your opinion would probably be of more value. Whether it's graphics or photographed images I don't truly see small problems or defects properly until printed usually. I appreciate your efforts and view with interest, but it would be nice if you had some comments on each image from your hands on stand point. One final idea is when you get a film scanner to give film it's due, you really need to go with a better model with a minimum res of at least 4000 dpi and preferably use a fine grained slide film. -----Original Message----- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 1:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Pentax (film) vs 5MP (SONY) For those of you who didn't read the very long thread about "*ist D sensor and 35mm lens resolution", I have posted shots made made with a Pentax MZ-S and different lenses compared to almost identical shots made with a Sony DSC F717 - a 5MP camera with a Carl Zeiss Vario Sonnar lens and a 6x8mm chip. I believe practical tests are equally informative as the facts of the figures (according to which a 6x5mm chip should not be able to produce much resulution). The link is this: http://gallery50012.fotopic.net/c132825_1.html Nest time I'll use and a dedicated film scanner. J.C. O'Connell suggested I'd use 50 or 100 ISO, but I guess the SONY (as well as the 'ist D) does not feature less than 200 ASA. And f 1:8 is the upper limit of the Sonnar lens, but not of the *ist D. (I believe that most lenses have their best reslolution/performance at f. 1:8 - 1:11, though). This bring me to suggset - again - that somone on this list will do similar tests, using the *ist D.... All the best Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
