You can skip the long introduction and go directly to the Digital vs. LF comparison shots.
His results would have been much better if he hadn't used "old expired film and a fifty year old lens".
On a more serious note, as much as I admire those of you that have the skill and patience to create those gorgeous LF prints, I will probably never consider the LF-film option because I KNOW my results will be similar to Ken's.
Of course, my kids shake their heads when they see me lugging a big DSLR on a hike. All they need is a P&S that fits into a shirt pocket.
Posted by Rene Pirolt on March 16, 2006 at 5:09 PM
And his results would have been even better with my buddy's 12x20 camera!
Amusing!
RichieV
Posted by Todd Caudle on March 16, 2006 at 5:23 PM
His digital vs. LF comparison shots are pretty funny. The first two or three times.
Ken definitely points out something that I've contended, and that is that my 12.8-mp 5D will NOT equal the detail inherent in 4x5. But its benefits are myriad, as his demo portrays.
Posted by Roger Rouch on March 17, 2006 at 10:52 AM
Arrf, arrf, arrf. I got a good chuckle out of it myself.
I get a bit of a kick out of Rickwell's articles and his sligthly contrarian attitude and point of view. There are some issues that he is probably close to correct in his opinions. A lot of folks who never or seldom make larger sized prints and then spend their hard earned money on the latest megapixel upgrades seem to be among his prime targets of discussion. Glad our freedom of speech allows for plenty of diverse opinions.
Discussion
4 replieshttp://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200/d200-vs-4x5.htm
You can skip the long introduction and go directly to the Digital vs. LF comparison shots.
His results would have been much better if he hadn't used "old expired film and a fifty year old lens".
On a more serious note, as much as I admire those of you that have the skill and patience to create those gorgeous LF prints, I will probably never consider the LF-film option because I KNOW my results will be similar to Ken's.
Of course, my kids shake their heads when they see me lugging a big DSLR on a hike. All they need is a P&S that fits into a shirt pocket.
Amusing!
RichieV
Ken definitely points out something that I've contended, and that is that my 12.8-mp 5D will NOT equal the detail inherent in 4x5. But its benefits are myriad, as his demo portrays.
I get a bit of a kick out of Rickwell's articles and his sligthly contrarian attitude and point of view. There are some issues that he is probably close to correct in his opinions. A lot of folks who never or seldom make larger sized prints and then spend their hard earned money on the latest megapixel upgrades seem to be among his prime targets of discussion. Glad our freedom of speech allows for plenty of diverse opinions.