Hello Simon, and a belated welcome to the OM list.
I think there are some "apples-oranges" issues in the comparison you posted
today. I have been shooting comparison images on film and with the C-5060
lately. One set might be worth looking at:
http://soli.inav.net/~jdub/filmdigi.html
There are apples/oranges issues with my comparison too, namely:
1) The source files are not the same size. I ignored that and just cut a
360 pixel (short side) piece from both images at actual pixels. The full
frame image is also set to 360 pixels on the short side. The film image
was scanned at 4000 ppi with a Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 using Silverfast
with a tiny bit of USM in the scanning software, and also reduced to
8-bit. The C-5060 image was shot in RAW mode and reduced from 16-bit to
8-bit in post-processing.
2) While the general location is the same, the shots are from different
days at different focal lengths. The film version was made with an OM-2S
and Zuiko 300/4.5. The C-5060 was shot at 110mm (35mm equiv.).
3) I don't think anyone would argue that Royal Gold 100 is the best film to
go head to head against digital capture. Also this roll was pretty
old. The color and grain, however, do not seem to be uncharacteristic for
this film.
There are probably lots of other technical problems with my presentation
that I am not technical enough to judge, but all the same I hope this is
helpful.
Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|