[nick h.]

Hi everyone, noob here. I'm baffled by a review of the LX. It says: "My LX sports a bleeding edge, full frame, interchangeable sensor. ISO sensitivity all the way to 3200. 20+ megapixel resolution." It makes me wonder whether this LX has been fitted with a digital back. But that's not possible, is it? Here's the link: Pentax LX - Pentax Manual Focus Film SLRs - Pentax Camera Reviews and Specifications

[Adam]

Hi everyone, noob here. I'm baffled by a review of the LX. It says: "My LX sports a bleeding edge, full frame, interchangeable sensor. ISO sensitivity all the way to 3200. 20+ megapixel resolution." It makes me wonder whether this LX has been fitted with a digital back. But that's not possible, is it? Here's the link: Pentax LX - Pentax Manual Focus Film SLRs - Pentax Camera Reviews and Specifications

The reviewer is referring to film, which is both full-frame and interchangeable but certainly not digital

[tuco]

I believe the comment was referring to changing film as the "sensor". And 20+MP resolution perhaps if you have one of the most expensive scanners ever made; otherwise, your commodity scanner most people can afford will not be achieving that resolution.

[nick h.]

OK....so when he talks about 20+ megapixels does he mean the theoretical pixel count of film? And he just has a standard LX?

[Adam]

OK....so when he talks about 20+ megapixels does he mean the theoretical pixel count of film? And he just has a standard LX?

You can easily get scans at that resolution, yes, if you're willing to go through the hassle.

[nick h.]

My problem is the temptation to buy an LX on ebay. I wear glasses and I want to do candid street photography - so the LX with action finder seems an amazing combo.

[tuco]

I don't know what the theoretical resolution of small format film is but a scanner such as the Nikon 9000ED (no longer made) has a true optical scan resolution rounded off to 4000 spi. That would yield approx a 5680x3780 image. The Hasselblad Flextight X1 and X5 can do 6300 and 8000 spi for 35mm film.

Now you may see advertisement of commodity flat bed scanners saying they can scan that high in interpolated modes. They can but it it only scales the image up and does not increase the resolution you scan much beyond 2400 spi and many lower than that. Then there is captured tonal scale. If you ever scanned or printed medium or large format film, there just seems to be way more tonal scale in them than small format film.

[stevebrot]

You can easily get scans at that resolution, yes, if you're willing to go through the hassle.

Not that hard actually. I do it all the time. Of course my scanner (no longer made Nikon 5000 ED) does do an honest 4000 dpi. As Tuco pointed out that yields an actual (not theoretical) count of just over 21 Megapixels. Whether that equates to the same image detail as a 21 Megapixel dSLR would depend on the film used and the skill of the operator *.


Steve


* Strict equivalence is hard to gauge, though I have doubts that a best vs. best shoot-out (35mm vs. dSLR) would go in favor of film for color images. For B&W, film might have an edge, though with the recent Leica M Monochrome...18 megapixel true-luminance sensor...arg!!!

[monochrome]

My problem is the temptation to buy an LX on ebay. I wear glasses and I want to do candid street photography - so the LX with action finder seems an amazing combo.

It is different, but it's like looking out the living room window at your scene.