 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Medium format / June 2004megapixel equivalent of 645?
My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that or I'll find it hard to justify keeping it compared to 35mm (both in terms of heftiness and cost). Gotta ask the question, what's the megapixel equivalent of a GA645? and specifically a GA645 and an epson 4870 at their best? by that i mean practically rather than theoretically. > My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few > things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and specifically a GA645 and an epson 4870 at their best? by that i > mean practically rather than theoretically. A lot. Enough that you won't be interested in a 6MP dSLR. Ever. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan > > My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few > > things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > A lot. Enough that you won't be interested in a 6MP dSLR. Ever. Nonsense. The answer is "Enough", period. Why in the world should anyone in his right mind be happy only to do a little better than a 6MP dSLR? I assert he will only do as well because the difficulties of proper scanning and printing are not trivial - unless one lowers his standards. > My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few > things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and specifically a GA645 and an epson 4870 at their best? by that i > mean practically rather than theoretically. I don't recall my ETRSi ever capturing a single pixel. I tended to load mine with Provia, which doesn't use pixels. A 4000 dpi scanner would capture an image roughly 9000 pixels by 7080 pixels from a 6x4.5cm neg. This figure was obtained by multiplying the width of the neg by the resolution of the scanner. Multiply both dimensions and divide by 1000000 to get your nice, satisfying megapixel figure.  SignatureMartin Francis http://www.sixbysix.co.uk "Go not to Usenet for counsel, for it will say both no, and yes, and no, and yes...." > My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few > things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and specifically a GA645 and an epson 4870 at their best? by that i > mean practically rather than theoretically. It doesn't matter - you won't be getting what you you should from the Epson 4870 scanner because unless you are easily pleased you are, for the most part, strapped to 8-bit image processing software and that won't get better for a couple years yet and then are looking at a huge re-investment in software and a new OS, possibly a new computer as well. Sucks, don't it? >> My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few >> things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Sucks, don't it? ???? I've sold thousands of prints from that 8-bit image processing software that I'm supposedly strapped to. Or are you talking about some alleged deficiency specific to the Epson 4870 driver? rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com > ???? > > I've sold thousands of prints from that > 8-bit image processing software that I'm > supposedly strapped to. There's no accounting for taste, Rafe. How many Elivs on Velvet's have been sold? Far more than your picture, I assure you. >It doesn't matter - you won't be getting what you you should from the >Epson 4870 scanner because unless you are easily pleased you are, for the >most part, strapped to 8-bit image processing software and that won't get >better for a couple years yet and then are looking at a huge re-investment >in software and a new OS, possibly a new computer as well. Seriously, john, this is just pure FUD and innuendo. What is it you're getting at? Do you have an indictment of the entire digital imaging industry? Something you know that Adobe or HP haven't quite figured out yet? Care to get specific, or does it work better for you to leave the allegations vague and lingering? rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com >My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few >things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >and specifically a GA645 and an epson 4870 at their best? by that i >mean practically rather than theoretically. Figure the 4870 is good for about half its rated resolution. That should give you the number you're looking for. 2400 * 6 / 2.54 = 5669 2400 * 4.5 / 2.54 = 4252 5669 * 4252 = 24 Mpixels You lose maybe 10% of the film area so call it 22 Mpixels. There's no affordable direct-capture solution that comes close to this. OTOH, it can be beat easily by a good MF film scanner like the LS-8000/9000 Imacon, drum scanner, etc. rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com > >My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few > >things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > MF film scanner like the LS-8000/9000 > Imacon, drum scanner, etc. Yup, and an 8000 can be had in like new condition (demo or refurbished) for 1200-1400 dollars on ebay. That's still a chunk of change, of course. I finally plunked mine down a few days ago. My change, that is. SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com >>My GA645 arrived, soon i'll be ordering an epson 4870 once i put a few >>things on ebay to reduce the guilt of my spending spree. Either that [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >You lose maybe 10% of the film area >so call it 22 Mpixels. That sounds about right. I'm using a 4870 with 6*6 from a Yashica 124G, and the end result seems to have similar "pixel level" quality to my DSLR when downsized to around 36 megapixels (6000*6000). That's in line with your guesstimate above for 645, given the difference in area. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.