More or less equivalent to 6x9cm? Of course, please don't consider these as perfect matching figures, just comparable size for the purpose the cameras are intended and the overall quality they can give. I won't adventure in computing perfect equivalence between film and digital, as there are too many variables and different aspects to weigh, so anybody can have a different result.
However, I believe that a practical following: 6-8 Mpix digital = 35mm film 11-12 Mpix digital = 645 film 16 Mpix digital = 6x6 film 22 Mpix digital = 6x9 film I've been reported by a friend of mine working in the graphics industry (and way more skilled than me) that he did a class on high-end digital photography last week. Looks like current top-end digital backs doing 4 to 16 exposures each shot (special technique, I agree) can outperform well large format film. You can shoot a room and then enlarge almost at your leisure, enough for seeing fingerprints on a window glass. Apparently, the current limit are the lenses, which cannot match the 300 lpm a sensor can read. Large format lenses are 50 lpm at best, best medium format lenses are somewhere around 70-80 lpm, while best digital APS lenses (two Nikkors, I'm afraid) reach 150 lpm. Dario ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 6:48 PM Subject: Re: state of the art 35mm DSLR > So, what might the new Hasselblad med format @ 22mp and 16bit color, and > which, I understand, has a price of $7,000, be? > > Shel > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Dario Bonazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Yes, I agree, but don't forget that 24x36 DLSR's are the digital medium > > format, aimed to that same pro customers which bought Hasselblads and > 6x7's. > > When you consider the lenses too, such a system is probably not more > > expensive than a complete 6x6 or 6x7 outfit. > > > > Amateurs, even advanced amateurs who bought 35mm high-end SLR's like many > > among us, are supposed to replace them with 6-8 Mpix APS-format DLSR's, > now > > under $1.7K. > > > > Also, it is interesting to note that the previous co-kings (Kodak 14Mp and > > Canon 11Mp) were introduced two years ago at Photokina 2002. Another sign > of > > them being top-end pro stuff, not the high-end consumer equipment which is > > usually superseded each year (while the average consumer stuff lives 6 > > months or so). > > > > Dario > >
