35mm lenses are typically of higher resolution in terms of lpmm as compared to MF lenses. However MF still has higher effective resolution because the increase in negative size is larger than the decrease in lens resolution. a 25% decrease in lens resolution per mm (pulling a number out of a hat, based on lens resolution numbers I've seen in the past) is much less notably when the size of the negative is increased by 75% or more in each dimension. And that's only the case of 645, larger formats have more notable increases (6x9 for example has more than 100% increase in both dimensions).
-Adam Jack Davis wrote: > This may not be true any longer, if it ever was, but 35mm lenses have > been tauted as having greater resolving power than MF lenses. Reason > that I heard offered many years ago was that wedding photographers used > mostly MF and they found a "creamy" image more acceptable to the > customer. > Lens tests, over the years, seemed to bare out the disparity. > LF lens resolving power v image size is another matter, obviously, and > one I'm not even prepared to guess about. > > Jack > > --- Perry Pellechia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I think you missed the point of the research. You do not necessarily >> need the sensor to be large. With their method an array or matrix of >> mirrors form the image area. >> >> Do I think this will reach us in a consumer camera? Probably not. >> But they do demonstrate that higher resolutions can be achieved by >> manipulating light before it reaches the sensor. >> >> On 10/6/06, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> High resolution ( like LF ) will always be impossible >>> With APS/FF sensors because the lenses will be the limiting >>> Factor. Only by going to larger sensors and longer lenses >>> With bigger image circles can LF type resolution ever >>> Be achieved in digital because small format lenses >>> Just don't image well enough...Y'all need to start >>> Dreaming about way better lenses instead... >>> jco >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of >>> Perry Pellechia >>> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:03 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: OT: Who needs mega pixels? >>> >>> I agree with you Paul. We tend to limit our expectations based on >>> what we have seen before. It is usually better to just sit back >> and >>> watch where the technology leads us to. >>> >>> >>> On 10/6/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Interesting. And it demonstrates that digital technology is far >> from >>>> its zenith. Something to think about when you hear the whines >> about >>>> how low noise and high resolution are impossible without large >>> sensors. >>>> Paul >>>> On Oct 6, 2006, at 9:31 PM, Perry Pellechia wrote: >>>> >>>>> When a single pixel may be all you need: >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=0003FA95- >>>>> AAB6-1526-AAB683414B7F0000&ref=rss >>>>> or/ >>>>> http://tinyurl.com/kezzp >>>>> >>>>> I hope you find this interesting too. >>>>> >>>>> Perry. >>>>> -- >>>>> <----------------------------------------------------> >>>>> Perry Pellechia >>>>> >>>>> Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry >>>>> <----------------------------------------------------> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> <----------------------------------------------------> >>> Perry Pellechia >>> >>> Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry >>> <----------------------------------------------------> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >> >> -- >> <----------------------------------------------------> >> Perry Pellechia >> >> Primary email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Alternate email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Home Page: http://homer.chem.sc.edu/perry >> <----------------------------------------------------> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
