Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-07-2009, 07:24 AM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
Well, some say that DSLRs has better noise control in shadows and thus, what you gain with negative in the highlights is offset by the deeper shadows of digital...

I've never done a qualitative showdown of the two side-by-side (shooting the same pic with both), but my guts tell me it's still far off (at least from a 100-160 iso negative)...
I'll do this as soon as I can...

Of course, resolution is greatly in favor of digital... I can barely squeeze a 6mp out of a good 100-160 neg, against my K20's 14.6MP...

I'd buy without hesitation a K20 EXR the very day it would be out! Damn Fuji for not letting this out of their compacts...

04-07-2009, 07:28 AM   #17
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
Well, some say that DSLRs has better noise control in shadows and thus, what you gain with negative in the highlights is offset by the deeper shadows of digital...
thats why you expose for the shadows and let the property of film hold on to the highlights



QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
Of course, resolution is greatly in favor of digital... I can barely squeeze a 6mp out of a good 100-160 neg, against my K20's 14.6MP...
explain? This is dependent a good deal on the scanner of your choice.
04-07-2009, 08:00 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
yeah i read that it has a "film" look to it, although there are 3rd party softs out there that can do that for you, you pick a film from a drop box and it makes it look like that , i forgot the name, my friend gave it a try.

still without messing around or exposure blending you cant reach the raw DR capabilies of negative film

although i'm sure that will change in 5 years, then film will really be obsolete
sorry for threadjack ...

the S5 gives crazy JPEGS w/ 10+ EV DR due to a different sensor design
Fujifilm S5 Pro Review: 18. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review
the film looks are to make it more appealing, sometimes pictures with too much DR look flat. supposedly it also has awesome indoors WB. you can tell that i wanted to get one...
04-07-2009, 08:04 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
to the op ... start w/ the ME Super, cheap, reliable and has Av
but gonna sell mines soon, i can't give up the automation

04-07-2009, 08:07 AM   #20
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by k100d Quote
sorry for threadjack ...

the S5 gives crazy JPEGS w/ 10+ EV DR due to a different sensor design
Fujifilm S5 Pro Review: 18. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review
the film looks are to make it more appealing, sometimes pictures with too much DR look flat. supposedly it also has awesome indoors WB. you can tell that i wanted to get one...
cool,

should be pretty cheap now, 3 years old.

also you can nab a bunch of relativly cheap nikon primes and you're good to go.

Last edited by Gooshin; 04-07-2009 at 08:15 AM.
04-07-2009, 08:09 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
I have a Minolta dImage Elite II scanner, and anything above 6MP results in scanning grain without any real added resolution, at least with colour negs I use...
I'm sure that 25 or 50 iso b&w negs can easily go up to 10MP, but not Kodak's Gold or Portra, or fuji's NPS or Superia negs...
At least, not with my setup...

But I don't ask for more, as they already make real nice 30cmx40cm enlargements...
04-07-2009, 08:54 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 499
Original Poster
Wow, that Fujifilm camera is a marvel. I don't get why the other manufacturers haven't been racing to copy its strengths for the past three years.

I suppose LXs are quite expensive. My film shooting is mainly for fun and in a way in order to help my digital shooting through teaching myself a more patient way of taking photos. A fully manual camera would be absolutely fine.

dlacouture, that photo is certainly one that is difficult to replicate on digital, especially if you want to avoid noise. I'll look into that film. 160ISO seems like a nice compromise, especially if the dynamic range is good.
04-07-2009, 08:58 AM   #23
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by brkl Quote
dlacouture, that photo is certainly one that is difficult to replicate on digital, especially if you want to avoid noise. I'll look into that film. 160ISO seems like a nice compromise, especially if the dynamic range is good.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-processing-printing-software/54579-e...e-removal.html

04-07-2009, 09:02 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 499
Original Poster
Heh, K10D RAWs feel big enough already, I don't think I'll take three for each photo, hoping for a very steady hand...
04-07-2009, 09:19 AM   #25
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by brkl Quote
Heh, K10D RAWs feel big enough already, I don't think I'll take three for each photo, hoping for a very steady hand...
you dont need a very steady hand, enfuse auto aligns.
04-07-2009, 10:09 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
cool,

should be pretty cheap now, 3 years old.

also you can nab a bunch of relativly cheap nikon primes and you're good to go.
there was a time when they were down to <$999 canadian, but i think they're really gone now. it's basically a D200, but weird Fuji interface. and doesn't use Nikon batteries
04-07-2009, 11:21 AM   #27
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
I have a Minolta dImage Elite II scanner, and anything above 6MP results in scanning grain without any real added resolution, at least with colour negs I use...
I'm sure that 25 or 50 iso b&w negs can easily go up to 10MP, but not Kodak's Gold or Portra, or fuji's NPS or Superia negs...
At least, not with my setup...

But I don't ask for more, as they already make real nice 30cmx40cm enlargements...

I think you can get a lot more than 10MP out of a good negative. Just scanned some Tmax100 to a little over 13MP and it looks good, and I think I could get more out of it. Grain on the other hand is still visible so a B/W converted pic from a K20D would have less grain I think. Can't complain about the dynamic range though.

I use an Epson V700 so it's some years younger than the Minolta, that probably makes a lot of difference.
04-07-2009, 12:59 PM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 499
Original Poster
I'll be honest: I keep hearing arguments for how sharp negatives are, but when people post examples of 10MP (or 20MP, or 30MP!) scans of negatives, they always look like they've been scanned at least two or three times larger than they need to. Simply blurry.

MF negatives are a different matter.

I just bought a ME Super off eBay for 30. But who knows what I'll receive in the mail.
04-07-2009, 01:08 PM   #29
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by brkl Quote
I'll be honest: I keep hearing arguments for how sharp negatives are, but when people post examples of 10MP (or 20MP, or 30MP!) scans of negatives, they always look like they've been scanned at least two or three times larger than they need to. Simply blurry.

MF negatives are a different matter.

I just bought a ME Super off eBay for 30. But who knows what I'll receive in the mail.
resolution and native DPI are different things.

My Nikon scanner has a true DPI of 3900, so when i scan at 4000 dpi, the resolution matches the clairty

other scanners claim to have 7000 dpi, or something, but their true dpi is only like 2000, so the rest of the pixels are just extrapolation, even though you get a huge MP file.

also i think the arguments are how sharp slides are, not negatives (although negatives can be sharp too)
04-07-2009, 01:21 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 499
Original Poster
Well I've never seen a convincing example.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
cameras, dr, film, pentax, pentax cameras, spotmatic
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good USA repairer for Pentax P&S film cameras? ChrisPlatt Pentax Compact Cameras 8 02-16-2008 12:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:19 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top