[rollei_list] Re: Digital Wins
- From: Richard Urmonas <rurmonas@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:22:33 +091800
Quoting Mark Rabiner <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Sorry Richard I really did get you all wrong on that.
> But are you referring to full frame (24x36) digital cameras supposedly
> replacing medium format?
> If you are this bugs me as well to no end.
No, when I wrote my initial comments it was about the claim
that a P&S digital was good enough render film obsolete.
Now I have no problem with people saying things along the
lines of '...for my purposes...' or '...to my eyes...'.
I do however dislike blanket statements.
>
> There is always going to be such a thing as needs for different formats.
Agreed. As anyone who has used cameras for a while will know, cameras are
just tools. Like all tools each has their applications, strengths and
weaknesses.
>
> Medium format and large format digital backs are priced formidably but
> they
> do do a much better job than 35mm capture devices. Just like in film.
> Lets not discount those either. They will come down in price soon enough.
> I plan on putting my Hasselblad glass and large format stuff to work
> digitally. I'm sure the results I'll get will be worth it.
> Just like in film.
> Acreage is acreage.
Agreed. I have not had the opportunity to play with a MF sensor
back, but it would be interesting to do so. I suspect as always
it will be positives and negatives comparing a MF with digital back
vs. film back. Certainly having the image capture directly
to digital would be a bonus, however the file sizes involved may make
using it outside a studio prohibitive.
>
>
>
>
> Mark Rabiner
> Photography
> Portland Oregon
> http://rabinergroup.com/
Richard
--
Richard Urmonas
Other related posts:
