Digital or 35mm best?

[breutus]

my .02 as well

until the recent D3 model by Nikon there has not been a sensor made as large as what 35mm frame size is, and if there was no camera with the same size sensor, quality could not have been up to par even if the megapixels were ridiculous.

But the D3 (at only 12.1 MP) is a full frame CMOS sensor that can extremely accurately reproduce any image as well or better than a 35mm camera.

But i shoot digital have for a while and would never go back because even without the same size frame the quality is so close the average person could not tell the difference. and the convince out ways everything!

 

[MCary]

The 5d has a full frame sensor and well as one of the 1D's. They were before the D3.

 

[BlueCorn]

Yup - really old thread but Canon has been shipping full frame sensors for over 3 years. The D3 may be Nikon's first but it's not the first. It's also half the resolution of Canon's flagship sensor but who's counting. Maybe in another 3 years they'll be able to match that too.

:lol:

 

[Poseidon]

1Ds Mark III = Full frame sensor and 21MP!!!! Yikes!

 

[MCary]

ANd at only $7000 what a bargain.

 

[BlueCorn]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12256869#post12256869 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by MCary
ANd at only $7000 what a bargain.

Considering what a 21mp medium format digital-back will cost you, that ain't bad.

 

[maroun.c]

I'm sure most of heavy shooters will spend that amount in 2-3 years for the price of film and processing not to mention the amount of film processed and sometimes printed which is non keeper shots. consdering that this body would last you for more than 2-3 years or at least fetch a good price at resale its not a total loss. pro film cameras were not "cheap" at film days and also high end pro film cameras were/are not cheaper. Funny thing is that Legacy high end film cameras fetch very high prices as collection items and it will be I guess a very long time if ever for pro digital cameras to start selling at higher prices. guess we better wait and see.
As for me I converted to digital years ago starting out with a 1.2 MP Olympus which believe it or not gave me some nice snapshots (sometimes better than what I get with a much better DSLR) then went to a D70s and still waiting to finish my lenses collection before I upgrade to a better body. although D300 is becoming a serious temptation. 2 years ago I found a used Nikon F100 (film body) and although not their latest and best SLR I bought it for 450 Euros. Only used it for 3 rolls of film so far and the roll in it has been in for 2 months now. However I use it for special shots that I have the time to compose... In the end when/if ever, you have the time and patience, nothing beats considering your framing much more, assessing the effect you need and working out your exposure, then taking the shot, waiting for your roll to be full, processing it then opening the bag in a rush to find out your results. No matter how I stress on doing this in digital I always find myself shoting in mass relying on the LCD to assess and then sometimes repeating or relying on PP. in the end I get somehow the same effect however it's always more pleasing when you realize you achieved it with film. I even sometimes look at pics I shot with my Zenit 125 TTL (a fully manual camera with no autofocus) with a 50mm 2.0 and it's really hard to believe I managed to control my exposure and nail my focus to get sharp pics of moving fish that I printed on A4 size paper and bigger... Guess for those who shot film it will always have that special feel and even if in few years I will not find films to shoot anymore I guess I'll just put that old antique film camera on display in 30-40 years and brag about it in front of my future grand children....