Hi Moose!
Your samples makes me wonder - there is a significant difference in details.
Could this be related to the scanning process of the 35mm developed picture?
If you compaire the developed 35mm picture with a print-out of the digital
picture is there still the same remarkable difference?
Regards - René Glad
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of ext Moose
Sent: 9. May 2005 12:42
Cc: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] My personal Film vs. Digital tests - II
Moose wrote:
On my recent trip, I took a few images with both OM-4 and 300D with the
same subjects <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/FvD02.htm>.
This is another pretty fair test, in that the same iso was used for both
and the zooms were at very similar effective focal lengths.
The 300D image covered a slightly bigger subject area, so was slightly
cropped to match the 35mm scan. Both were downsampled to the same jpeg
size with WPPro.
This time, I both compared downsampled film to 300D and upsampled 300D
to full size film scan.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|