Hi Bojidar, on 25 Jan 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
>Keep in mind, and he says it a few times, he is comparing real-world >results. Yes, but he determines the rules of this real-world. I believe that everything is true for his own work. But I think his test setup is not objective enough. Just have a look at this page: http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/Canon_1DS/45_film_1ds.html The MF-results are much better than those of the 1Ds, here. So the results of these comparisons are very dependent of the test setup. I don't want to say which test is better or even that analog is better than digital or vice versa. I just want to say that there is no such simple answer. It depends on you own needs and workflow. Many of us (like me) are very interested in this subject but are not in the lucky situation of owning or just testing a DSLR. So we have to rely on these tests. What I dislike about Michael's last comparison is, that he suggests that digital is superior. His prior tests were more objective. >As to the ICE technology, I have not kept my knowledge current, but >articles about 6 months old were suggesting that while dust is gone, so >is sharpness and contrast... A friend of mine is using the Coolscan 8000ED. He has activated ICE3 always as the advantages are obvious. He doesn't complain about sharpness or contrast problems. But I will have a closer look next time I visit him...;-) Regards, Heiko
