Quote Originally Posted by Don Hutton View Post
Honestly, it would be a joke to try and extract any meaningful conclusion from those two little jpegs.

I own a drum scanner and have done a lot of comparative testing with film formats of various sizes and with my 5D and my Leica M8. Meaningful comparison requires looking at the whole file in detail - crops will almost always skew favor one way or another in an unrepresentative way.

Incorrect. "Anything" on a computer screen is not two people standing in front of numerous print sizes of the same image taken with two different tools and attempting to determine the facts based on what they see (in a blindfolded/not knowing which prints are from the digital file and which are from the film file). Looking at the whole file in detail is entirely irrelevant...

On the digital capture vs film scan comparisons, this is a real issue because the different capture mediums have different strenghs. Also, I do find that while digital capture tends to hold up well to a point of magnification, once exceeded, it falls apart very quickly; whereas scanned film deteriorates much more slowly.

And you have seen 4X5 images compared to Betterlight images?

I remember a few years back looking at MRs 1DS comparison to MF film scanned on a drum scanner and his crops etc seemed to suport his conclusion (to some extent) - when I did my own tests, I was shocked to see how different they were and how they gave me a completely different answer.

Again, what's the point in these "on screen" tests?