Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Film vs Digital video
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Adapters and other accessories
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:20 am    Post subject: Film vs Digital video Reply with quote
I'm not sure if someone posted this b4 Razz

http://fwd.five.tv/videos/challenge-blow-up-part-3

Quote:
The last part of the Blow Up challenge is a test between digital and film photography. Digital cameras have improved in leaps and bounds over the last few years but does film still produce the best results?


PostPosted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Film vs Digital video Reply with quote
Srono wrote:
I'm not sure if someone posted this b4 Razz

http://fwd.five.tv/videos/challenge-blow-up-part-3

Quote:
The last part of the Blow Up challenge is a test between digital and film photography. Digital cameras have improved in leaps and bounds over the last few years but does film still produce the best results?


Interesting.
I knew the outcome before watching the video. Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
They didn't compare like-with-like. As far as I recall they took the easy way and used 400 ISO on both cameras. To make it fairer they should have been using the best available film of the heyday of the film camera, put up against the finest setting of the digiSLR. I'm fairly sure if they'd been using (for example) ultra-fine ASA 25, Kodak TechPan (which is still available) for black and white; or for colour, Kodak claim Ektar 100 is the finest grained colour neg film today, they'd have had a different result.

It struck me as a typically biased piece of techo-geek reportage, in that the new is always better.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 2:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:
They didn't compare like-with-like. As far as I recall they took the easy way and used 400 ISO on both cameras. To make it fairer they should have been using the best available film of the heyday of the film camera, put up against the finest setting of the digiSLR. I'm fairly sure if they'd been using (for example) ultra-fine ASA 25, Kodak TechPan (which is still available) for black and white; or for colour, Kodak claim Ektar 100 is the finest grained colour neg film today, they'd have had a different result.

It struck me as a typically biased piece of techo-geek reportage, in that the new is always better.


The most interesting thing a about this video is that digital has come a long way and it will get much better with time.

I knew the outcome before watching the video for the same reasons you posted. This is a 'digital hype piece'.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
spiralcity wrote:


The most interesting thing a about this video is that digital has come a long way and it will get much better with time.

I knew the outcome before watching the video for the same reasons you posted. This is a 'digital hype piece'.

The comparison was interesting enough and without a doubt digital has equalled /overtaken some film, but I got the impression they just couldn't wait to burst forth with the 'news' of that.
Digital is magic; I love it - but I prefer objectivity in reporting.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm still waiting to hear how they enlarged the film image. I assume they scanned it, so that adds an extra process. Not a fair test in my view.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Adapters and other accessories
Page 1 of 1