Search:

Is that what is demonstrated in this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-3IBi5tC08

I just sold my GFX100 :p

But I think you're right, I'm going to get in touch with some of the few remaining drum scanners out there and see if they have some demo files they can send me.

You're ruining my foreplay.

I totally understand. Shooting at f/8 on 8x10 is not what I had in mind, but I referenced that aperture as the mathematical outcome of the resolution rule of thumb I quoted in the first post. That's...

It does. I just didn't want the thread to be derailed into film-digital comparisons. The differences between 4x5 and 8x10 in the context of their optical compromises is really what I was trying to...

Roughly equivalent to the planck length. :p It's definitely not 8 feet away from behind a velvet rope.



Actually no, I've just been using it is a proxy for formats requiring a 300mm image...

This is not the first time I've heard this, and it still confuses me. Is it really the case that the only real advantage of 8x10 is for contact prints? That seems so counterintuitive given the...

I put the word "resolution" in quotes because I understand it is quite the loaded term...and ironically has dubious applicability when it comes to film.

I have been doing digital mosaics...

I just think its cool :) I'd probably try to stock up...Velvia 100 is obviously now dead here in the US, but I can get 50 from Japan for now at least. I'm cautiously optimistic that some of the...

That's totally understandable. My large prints currently are almost all digital mosaics stitched in software. 300MP seems to be about the sweet spot for 8 foot wide Fujiflex prints. I have no problem...

Bayer filters are also the bane of astrophotographers. We use monochromatic cameras with RGB filters (among others) that we combine in software. So that benefit is definitely not lost on me.

Resolution. If someone made a 300MP 2:1 aspect ratio digital camera that I could rent right now, I almost certainly would not be considering this.



Don't get caught up in that. Pretend I said...

This is highly interesting...not sure how I missed it.

Relevantly, they do point out that



...which has implications for the 1500 rule I quoted earlier. Although now the accuracy of that...

Thankfully none of those things are of particular concern. I’ve really just narrowed the inquiry to the comparability of 4x5 and 8x10 image quality in view of limitations inherent to the format.

The risk is that if I go this route and I am not overly thrilled with the result, I will have to wonder how much of the problem is due to the fact that I cheaped out on the equipment. So I will...

That's fair. I suppose my hesitation with that course would be expressed in the feeling that I was buying a "disposable" camera. But they do seem to hold some value.



Interesting; I'm glad I...

...exactly how representative is it of 8x10?

I really would like to jump into a LF system for landscapes. 8x10 (and actually 4x10) is where I am fairly certain I'd like to end up, but I'm having...