Anyone get an M9 for Christmas?

[George S.]

snip..... Which is interesting because I have been told by quite a lot of people who should know (film, camera and lens manufacturers, and imaging software engineers) that you need at least 18 megapixels to equal film quality.

Of course there are other 18+ megapixel cameras, but I happen to prefer Leicas to SLRs.

Cheers,

R.

I'm aware that there are many technical ( in-camera image processing software, etc) as well as subjective variables involved, ( I've seen 2.1 MP cameras that beat out some other 5 or 6 MP ones) and I don't want to start another film vs. digital discussion, but I can recall that about 2 years ago there was a discussion that the (somewhat) agreement was that a slow, fine film could only be equalled with a digital that had 24 megapixel's worth of reslution. I guess I don't really have a point to this posting other than I wish there really was some way of defining it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'm aware that there are many technical ( in-camera image processing software, etc) as well as subjective variables involved, ( I've seen 2.1 MP cameras that beat out some other 5 or 6 MP ones) and I don't want to start another film vs. digital discussion, but I can recall that about 2 years ago there was a discussion that the (somewhat) agreement was that a slow, fine film could only be equalled with a digital that had 24 megapixel's worth of reslution. I guess I don't really have a point to this posting other than I wish there really was some way of defining it.

Dear George,

Yeah... 18-22 and 24 depend a lot on subject matter, and I'd agree that a good 18 will beat a bad 24. Consider fine hair detail: jaggies vs. grain. You'd need 30+ megapixels.Then think of hand-held low-light: maybe 6 megapixels. There IS no direct comparison, not least because you're comparing a regular array (Bayer) with a random array (grain), but to compare anything less than18 megapixels with decent 35mm (fine grain slide film, carefully focused with a good lens, camera on tripod) is a bit of a joke.

Also, is grain 'meaningful' information? Think 80 megapixels...

Cheers,

R.

 

[gb hill]

Roger, hopefully I'll get to read your review in Shutterbug! You & Frances are the only reason I ever buy the mag anymore. Stay warm by the fire.

 

[Krosya]

I didnt get M9, but if I did, I'd trade it for a real camera......

 

[JohnTF]

Dear George,

Yeah... 18-22 and 24 depend a lot on subject matter, and I'd agree that a good 18 will beat a bad 24. Consider fine hair detail: jaggies vs. grain. You'd need 30+ megapixels.Then think of hand-held low-light: maybe 6 megapixels. There IS no direct comparison, not least because you're comparing a regular array (Bayer) with a random array (grain), but to compare anything less than18 megapixels with decent 35mm (fine grain slide film, carefully focused with a good lens, camera on tripod) is a bit of a joke.

Also, is grain 'meaningful' information? Think 80 megapixels...

Cheers,

R.

Sounds like a new book in the works?

That is a rather large cord, when you start buying them in the US, seems they become rather smaller.

The couches offer stands, they do put sheets and pillows out as well. ;-) Am positive Jorge would come over. They will Xray your cameras when you arrive and ask if you are a pro, they even asked me because I had more than one lens.

Looks as if you had a shot at a white Christmas, not too often there, never here, but a Boxing Day party in the old town.

Regards, John