>Point is: Nothing is perfect or ultimate...there's tradeoffs...you have
>to make up your mind whether the compromise is worth it. For me,
>life's too short (and other things are too important), to strain over the
>last 2.5%. If you *really* want more exact focus/resolution, do
>manual or go up a format size (or two or three).
The only real advantage for larger formats that I can see is a reduction in
grain in the negative. There's an interesting article about the various
formats on the photodo web site: http://www.photodo.com Basically, if you
intend to blow an image from each format (35mm, 2 1/4, 4x5) to the same
paper size, keep the field of view the same, *and* you want to keep the
depth of field the same, then an interesting thing happens. Since the larger
formats use correspondingly longer lenses as thier standard lens, you have
to stop down further on the larger formats to achieve the same depth of
field of 35mm. Then you slam up against the diffraction degradation in the
larger formats. In thier test, using Tmax100, and the above limitations, the
resolution was the same across all 3 formats.
Be seeing you.
Dirk Wright
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|