Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39
  1. #11
    Digital will work, but you asked our opinions. I think film is much better. If your target format is something digital or some sort of screen graphics, I think digital is the right way to go. If your target is a slide projector or print, I think film is the way to go. [again, I am a big fan of using the right tool for the right job]
    Eric Adler (tonsofpcs)
    http://www.videoproductionsupport.com/ Chat at: http://tinyurl.com/vpschat
    Follow me on twitter: @videosupport @eric_adler

  2. #12
    ite thx

  3. #13
    Hmm... I'm a film user myself, tonsofpcs, but frankly blowing up 35mm the size of a wall without pixelation (rather, grain, remember proper terms for proper tools for the proper job...) is a tad too much, no?

    My take for you rackdude, is to buy/borrow the biggest megapixel camera as you can, shoot it, edit it, print it.

    And yes, rebel xt will do.
    There's no bad camera, just a bad user
    Loong . Singapore

  4. #14
    Quote
    Quote: nagar
    View Post
    [COLOR=Olive]Hmm... I'm a film user myself, tonsofpcs, but frankly blowing up 35mm the size of a wall without pixelation (rather, grain, remember proper terms for proper tools for the proper job...) is a tad too much, no?
    Slide film tends to not show much grain, and grain is not pixelation, sure you lose 'data' where the grain borders are, but inside the grain is near infinite depth (ok, it's just a large but finite number, but its still much larger than that of a CCD's pixels.)

    I guess it wouldn't surprise you all that I prefer shooting everything full manual and controlling audio/video levels as much as possible to minimize loss
    Eric Adler (tonsofpcs)
    http://www.videoproductionsupport.com/ Chat at: http://tinyurl.com/vpschat
    Follow me on twitter: @videosupport @eric_adler

  5. #15
    Nope, I'm not the least surprised. You sound like one in your posts

    It's great to shoot in manual, I use fully manual cameras for b&w for weddings and events still (and I only use film cameras for b&w as of now).
    There's no bad camera, just a bad user
    Loong . Singapore

  6. #16
    looks like ill go rebel xt, cuz im a photo n00b, so imma stay away from film....

    im a computer type-o-guy

  7. #17
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sabir
    Posts
    1
    Hi, This post is very informative, however I would like some specific information. If someone can help me then please send me a private message. Best Regards,


    Dropshippers Directory | Wholesale Directory
    Property Portal
    Wholesale Dropshippers

  8. #18
    Hi Sabir,

    You can post your questions here if you need to. We encourage public posting so everyone can learn from the issue as well.

    Cheerio!
    There's no bad camera, just a bad user
    Loong . Singapore

  9. #19
    Senior Member SC358's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    608
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rackdude -
    Megapixels has no equivelency to a professional look. This term is also highly subjective to the viewer as well. A high-end point and shoot will look excellent when printed out to the right size. But, "the look", also includes the composition of your shot in color, lighting, depth of field or even something with artistic flair.

    I bought a Panasonic DMC FX-50 for my wife last year. It's a great little camera and she absolutely loves it! I like it a lot but I don't have enough control over speed and light. Less than a year later I did my research and got myself a Rebel XTI while other collegues of mine are going with Nikon D series (I can't afford that).

    Imho, 5-7MP point and shoot with a good lens can work well, with limitations in a professional sense. I think your Rebel XT is a good way to go because there's lots of room to grow into.
    SC358
    Relationships are based on compromises - behavior accepted is behavior repeated.

  10. #20
    The first group of digital cameras that we purchased for the editorial staff (six years ago) was the Nikon Coolpix 800, which had a Whopping TWO megapixel sensor

    We just purchased our third series of new staff cameras and one of the main criteria we'd learned was that whatever we bought, it had to have a minimum of 7 mpx. As tonsofpcs mentioned, this will be the right tool for this job, for us. A 7 mpx is affordable as well as appropriate to what we need (newspaper).

    More megapixels, for me, means that each pic is a larger 'canvas' - more color detail. That way I don't have to fool around a lot in adjusting the pix for print. More mpx allows me to crop and select what I want from an image, without losing a lot of quality.

    Our new Nikons will have 12.3 mpx, so I guess I will know better then.

    I don't think that on-line megapixels make much difference - mostly they all look good on the screen. Your oversize prints will be the proof of mpx quality. I agree that digital can't compare to the quality you get from film.

    eyepatch

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Subscribe to us on YouTube