Pixels don't count the same. For eg the 11 MP ids easily beast 99% of 35mm films ( sorry really low speed films like agfa pan 25 etc still out resolve and have no grain ) and rivals medium format, while the kodak 14n matches 35mm film and is a poor example of more pixels means better. people say 50% of the detail in film is gain and I believe that, having scanned lots of film at 4000 dpi and seeing it my self, I would say most films have about 10-12 MP of real detail, the rest is grain ( once again with exceptions like provia 100, agfa pan 25, tech pan 50 etc or really horrible stuff ). A medium format back with 16-20mp will easily out do a normal 645 neg but conversly good low speed films will turn the tables around. The mega cam project ( for deep space telescopes ) using a ccd array needed 640 mp to equal a 8x10 sheet film capture BTW so those large format guys are safe for a REAL long time. The #'s don't equate at all, you have some really bad films that are horrible, and some noisey ccd/cmos sensors that turn their potential 5,6 14 MP to mush so counting numbers becomes meaningless. That said if it takes $8000 to beat 35mm digitally, I'll just use my $120 TLR and shoot 6x6 negs and slides, scan them at 4000 dpi with a grain reduction filter ( thats a 9600x9600 pixel image ) and wait for a digi can that will equal that for $1000
|
