Mark Schaefer said:
At some point I want to buy a full frame dSLR, probably more for civilized settings rather than hiking. But from what I have seen of the output of full frame dSLRs they are still not equal in sharpness to a good film camera with good glass and using current Velvia slide film. And given that Fuji is still improving Velvia (it is a moving target) the cross over point when digital will finally surpass the best of 35mm film photography is probably 2-3 years or more away. I am guesstimating it will require a minimum of 32 megapixels.
...
The following is just a cautionary note on expectation settings. The images I have taken with the XTi are not as sharp as my 35mm film camera with the current Velvia; not even using my current L series lenses on the XTi.
What process are you using to compare the sharpness of Velvia vs. dSLR? I have to say that I fairly strongly disagree with your statements so I'm interested in know how you made the comparisons. I shot Velvia for over 10 years and loved it, however now I would never go back.
If you mean using a $100,000 drum scanner to scan Velvia and comparing that to a dSLR output then
maybe you might have a point, but even then I tend to doubt it. But who has access to that technology or more importantly who wants to pay someone $50 - $80 a slide to use one to scan their shots.
People want to do two things with their photos these days: post them or email them online, and make prints. For both of those tasks, a dSLR will blow away using a film camera with Velvia. Shooting slides, getting them processed, scanning them at home, and making prints from the scans is a PAINFUL process. The other option is to pay a lab around $100+ to make 1 good print from a slide.
Yes, you might get an electron microscope and determine that Fuji Velvia has more resolution than X dSLR, but it means nothing in the real world. I can take a shot from my dSLR, crop it to 1/3 of the image, and make a bigger, sharper print than I ever could from slide film printed full frame.
Color and sharpness in digital photography depends on image post processing. It is the nature of the beast. The term "digital darkroom" is spot on. A photographer using a dSLR needs to spend time in the digital darkroom to get the most of the equipment. It is the same as shooting film and developing and printing yourself vs. dropping the roll off at CVS. But then even if you shoot in Auto mode with .jpg's you will still get better results than Kodak 100 Gold dropped off at photo counter at CVS.
- darren