My non-scientific film vs. digital comparison

[djacobox372]

On a whim I decided to take two photos from the same spot, one with my nikon d700 at and another with a 6x7 medium format camera using velvia 100.

After scanning, I matched the white balance and saturation of the images as closely as possible.

Here are the results.

D700, cropped to 50%:

6x7 velvia 100, cropped to 50%:

Overall they are pretty equal when displayed this small. The colors in the digital version are a bit truer to what I observed.

note: the dof on the digital shot is wider due to the smaller image area and shorter focal length for the same framing/exposure.


Now for a closeup, to see how the d700's resolution stacks up to 6x7 film:

D700 (closer then 1:1, for comparison):

6x7 velvia 100:

Here you can see a fairly large advantage on the side of 6x7 film, could be as much as double the resolving power (that's 48mp to the d700's 12)

Film was scanned with a consumer quality epson v700.

Of course there is nothing scientific about this test, just something I did out of my own curiosity.

 

[Ken Rockwell Fan]

The grass looks more natural and detailed on the 6X7 imo.

 

[compur]

Interesting!

 

[Paul Ron]

But you converted the film image to digital by scanning it, that just makes it a didicrap pic.

Put each print (digi printed vs analog printed) under the analog microscope n see the real difference. AH HA! Poster vs photo!... now I see.