35mm vs MF vs digital

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by Rob, Apr 18, 2005.

  1. Rob

    Rob TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    6,217
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    London
    Oooh, controversial!

    I happen to have taken the same(ish) shot with three different cameras and was comparing the results...

    The 35mm was shot with a Nikon F3 with Nikkor f1.2 50mm loaded with 100 ISO Fuji Reala, the Medium was taken on my Zeiss Super Ikonta f2.8 80mm with 100 ISO Fuji Reala and the digital was taken with an Olympus C60 the zoom at approximately 70mm.

    The film was scanned in by the shop (Noritsu machine I think?) and the digital was captured as SHQ or whatever the top setting for JPG is. The images has been converted to B&W as the colours were the same and the file was a little large.

    Results are interesting, given that the 1930's camera appears better than the 1980's and 2000's technology.

    It's not really a fair independent test and I'm not trying to prove a point, but it's how I shoot with these three cameras that I'm comparing and I thought you all might like to see the results.

    In case you wondered about the picture, it's probably an old ticket booth on Brighton's ruined West Pier.

    R

    [​IMG]



    Original image
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Menard

    Menard TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is an article which may be of interest to those wanting to compare film to digital, although there are no photos.

    A Few Notes on the Evolution of Digital Cameras.

    You have done a very interesting comparison, ronhesketh. I hope you don't mind that I have posted a link on my board to this page so others can view your results.
     
  3. panocho

    panocho TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Compostela, GZ
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Yes, really interesting test! But, I would hesitate jumping to the conclusion that 1930's camera beat the technology of half a century later. Is not just the format which makes the difference?
    On the other hand, I would very much support the point that technology does not get photos better, though. Of course it does not! It only helps the photographer simplify the process of taking a picture (and sometimes, complicate it!).
    But this is out of the discussion. Thanks for sharing these most interesting results!
     
  4. voodoocat

    voodoocat ))<>(( Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Gilbert, AZ
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    A 7.18 x 5.32 mm sensor is being compared with a 36x24 mm and a 60x60 mm negative. It's like comparing apples to semi-trucks.
     
  5. thebeginning

    thebeginning TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    medium format cameras are so expensive though. i would so have one by now...
     
  6. voodoocat

    voodoocat ))<>(( Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Gilbert, AZ
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Give the Yashicamat D, EM, LM or 124G a try. Should be able to find one on ebay for less than $100. (not the 124G, they are about $150)
     
  7. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    While the camera is from the 1930s, the image capturing technology you were using in it (the film) is state of the art.
     
  8. Digital Matt

    Digital Matt alter ego: Analog Matt

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,346
    Likes Received:
    65
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Next time us a Canon 1Ds Mk II to compare to MF, or a Leaf Valeo 22mp back.

    Each format has its use.
     
  9. Menard

    Menard TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean for only $8,000 I can get a camera that might come close to comparing with my $100 medium format camera? Wow!! :cheer:
     
  10. Kent Frost

    Kent Frost TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    572
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Springfield, MO USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Four years ago, Canon's D30 was the big gun DSLR. It rated at a whopping 3.2MP and cost a mere $3,000 for the body alone.

    Today an 8MP Digital Rebel XT body is only $899.

    In four years, they've gone up short of 3 times the quality, and they're 1/3 the cost.

    Just be patient.

    Check this site out: http://www.gigapxl.org/
     
  11. Menard

    Menard TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't doubt that. The price drops in just the past year have been very promising, particularly with the DSLRs. I don't see it within the next year or so, but, at some point down the road we will see high megapixel DSLRs compete favorably in price with the 35mm SLRs of today. :)
     
  12. Bob Fiske

    Bob Fiske TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    If you follow the suggestion of getting the Yashica D, get the model with the Yashinon lens. It's the later, 4 element, Tessar formula, sharper lens. BTW, the 124 and the 124G have this lens as well.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

35mm vs digital

,

35mm vs mf

,

compare images with 35mm and mf

,

medium format versus 35mm

,

medium format vs 35mm

,

mf vs 35mm

,

nikon f3 reala

,

somepoint on chlak board vsdigital board