Quote:
Originally Posted by Ostara
I don't mean digital is useless. Just that, if you want to make an 8x10 print from 35mm film, it will be perfectly clear, but if you want to make an 8x10 print from 6 megapixels, it's going to look bad.
Most people want digital for online work, which if fine, you could even go so low as to have a four megapixel camera for that; or just to print out handy little 4x6s or 5x7s to pass around, put in an album or whatever, and if that is the case, then a 5+ megapixel will be perfectly acceptable.
Especially for newpaper work, where the print quality is somewhat low anyway, a high res isn't going to be needed. For mag. work a higher res would be good, but isn't completely necessary.
But still, in terms of quality for space, film is better (unless you've got $30,000.00).
 |
there's more to it than megapixels. I've done 8x10s with a 1.2 megapixel canon a10 and they looked great. I still have a few on my walls. 7 years and still lookin' good. not bad if you ask me.
the megapixel myth is what keeps people buying cameras that are junk because they're 10mp with a terrible lens and sensor.
the prints from my xt are excellent. better than my old film prints? maybe. I always had my film stuff printed commercially, but digitally I control post processing....and that's a real advantage.
Linear Mode
