True a disposable won't do but a ZX-M with say a 50mm or good inexpensive
Zoom such
as the FA 28-70mm will give you close to that for about $300.00 US. Add
another $300
for a 2700 dpi film scanner and it's still cheep compared to a pure digital
solution.
The cost difference will buy an awful lot of film and processing.
At 10:29 AM 7/25/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> Doctor Digi penned:
> >
> > > +You need at least 14MB of data to get a "decent" 5 x 7 print.
> > > Any shot from a $7.95 one-use film camera puts ~60~ MB of data
> > > on a 24 x 36 negative.
> >
> > I'd like to know how you work that one out...
>
>He didn't say it was useful image data :-)
>
>A 4000 dpi scan of a 35mm frame, at only 24 bits/pixel, is 60MB.
>So is a 2700 dpi scan at greater pixel depths (from scanners that
>can deliver 10, 12, or 14 bits per component).
>
>A good lens can easily deliver 4000dpi of resolvable data on modern
>100-speed films (although that's getting pretty close to the usable
>limit, especially for hand-held shots).
>
>Claiming a cheap disposable camera can do that well is hyperbole.
>
>
>--
>John Francis . . . . . . . . . . (650) 429-4427
>MyWay.com 444 Castro St. Suite 101, Mt. View, CA 94041
>
>Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your Father. Prepare to die.
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
>visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
