Even 5-10 years ago, the resolution advantages of 4x5 were marginal at best in comparison to 50MP digital sensors. There are very few such comparisons actually made, for all the confident pronouncements one can read in forums. You can google for real world comparisons of 4x5 film and high res digital backs. I really think you might change you perspective on this if you tried using a 4x5 camera in realistic conditions (which it seems you have not?) I read so many posts online extolling the theoretical resolution of large format film, but these are almost never accompanied by actual comparison shots. (Even if your focusing judgment is perfect - which it isn’t - you are going to move the rear standard to at least some extent when you insert the film holder film holders and cameras are calibrated with a margin of error and sheet film does not lie perfectly flat.) It’s things like camera shake and focusing precision. The theoretical resolution of the film itself isn’t the limiting factor, as I explained above. A good chunk of the theoretical resolving ability of the film and lens is lost once you're stopped down to that extent. Typical apertures for 4x5 landscape photography are around f22-32. The actual experience of using a 4x5 camera (outdoors at least) tends to consist of taking your best guess at accurate focus while squinting at a dim ground glass through a loupe, and then hoping that you triggered the shutter at the precise moment when the wind stopped blowing.įinally, one has to take diffraction into account. It's also worth mentioning that for realistic large format photography, accurate focus and camera shake start to become significant limiting factors. I shoot 4x5 as a hobby, but I've long ago given up any illusion that it has practical resolution benefits over the best digital equipment. If you disagree, I'd be interested to see some comparison shots backing this up. Even five or ten years ago the best digital systems were able to capture about as much detail as you could realistically squeeze out of a 4x5 negative. Theoretically perhaps, but you have to look at the whole imaging system (including the inevitable loss from scanning or optical printing in the case of film). >the resolution of 4x5 film easily exceeds any commercially available digital sensor, with pretty much any halfway decent lens.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |