1800?? Strange figure. There's 3024 pixels (RAW) covering a little less than one inch. How is that 1800 line pairs? If I interpolate I can get perhaps 6048 or 12096 or ? pixel along one side of an image. The resolution can probably reach 3024/2= 1512 line pairs/mm equal to 1600 ppi. In my experience (Epson Perfection 3200 Photo) - that's abuot the limits for where higher resolution wount get you better images from a neg anyway:
This is a crop from a SMC M 2/85mm at f8, scanned to 6400 ppi: http://gallery50012.fotopic.net/p3270890.html This is a similar crop from a Sony DSC F717 (5 mp) at f8 and what is equal to 85mm: http://gallery50012.fotopic.net/p3270896.html So, as far as I'm concerned, a 200 ASA superia and a 35mm pentax camera and lens can't really outperform a 5 MP digital camera. If you walk arround with a 200-400ASA film camera (no tripod and medium speed), it will not give you better resolution or sharper images than an average 5 mp digital camera, according to the many test I made. Regardless of any math. Of cource, if I bought a 20 K USD Imacon scanner it might improve the negs a tiny bit. But for 20K USD I could get a pretty nice digital Pentax outfit - 2 bodies, flash, and many lenses. I would sertainly prefere that to the hazzle of scanning al those negs. I took 5600 pics with my *ist D in two months. The cost of film, developing etc. would exceed the cost of the *ist D and leave me with pictures not really better than the ones I got. I can understand why the world is turning to digital now. It's simply better value for the same money! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 4. november 2004 01:53 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: USAF target and resolution tests you have completely missed the point: the # of pixels along the dimension has little to do with resolution. *istd it's 1800 *resolved* pixels along 24mm edge. sharpen and interpolate all you want -- that's all you have. the rest is as relevant as Cavo's famous 4-pixel image. best, mishka On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:48:26 +0100, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, I guess a SONY 3008 pixels 24mm sensor can resolve something like > 3008/2/24 = 62 lpm equal to app 3200 ppi. > That's not so bad after all, is it? I know I could never get more out of a > 35mm neg, if I scanned to more than perhaps half of that - i.e. 1600ppi! >
