On 25/3/05 17:33, Berry Ives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still waiting for the right DSLR for me...
Berry
What will make a DSLR the one for you?
Just curious.
Brad
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL
So, is that full frame 35mm or full frame 645? 25 mp full frame
35mm size is a tall order. How long do you expect to have to wait for
such a thing?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For me, the color mask has to go. Some sort of Foveon like technology is
needed. I'd like to see the pixel spacing
That would be 35mm if I did the math right. I'm guessing more than 5
years and less than 10. When my old 35mm developed a shutter timing
problem which I deemed not worth the money to fix (about a year or so
ago), I looked at the DSLR market and decided I just wouldn't be happy
with the results, so
Hi Brad,
I think I would be satisfied for a while at least with 200ppi on the largest
prints I can make on a 2200 printer, let's say 12 x 16, which works out to
about 8 megapixels. Since Olympus has an 8 megapixel CCD on the E300
Evolt already, I am waiting for them to put it on an E-3, or
It's been several years, but I seem to remember that when I got my
Nikon 4000ED filmscanner they were claiming a Dmax of somewhere
around 3.5 to 4.0, but I measured it (by scanning a Kodachrome IT8
target slide and examining the greyscale separation) at around 2.1
to 2.9 (don't remember the exact
Hi Berry,
Austin, with respect to your last sentence, isn't the point
really that the
contrast range of negative film is greater than slide film?
I'm not sure what contrast range is, but I know what density range is.
Slide film has less exposure latitude, and records on a higher density
When you scan negative film, the histogram is narrow. So I would say
negative film has a low dynamic range.[Yeah, I know slide and negative
film is really the same.]
I think I see the confusion here (or specmanship). The dynamic range of
a dataconverter is related to the number of bits, since the
From: Andrew Skretvedt
In evaluating a film scanner, one should consider its dynamic range. How
deep can a scanner reach in and pull out shadow details from a very
contrasty slide, for example. What about one that might have been
underexposed a bit as you tried to keep from blowing out