Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    I posted a precis of my comparison of medium format film and high end DSLRs on Petapixel.

    Comparing the Image Quality of Film and Digital

    But the full article including some interesting results from Henning Serger about film resolution is here..

    https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2014/1...vs-6x7-velvia/

    Here's one of the key comparison images



    I hope you don't mind me posting a link to it here - the reaction to the previous LF/MFDB comparison seemed to be generally well accepted. Let me know if I've transgressed though. (I know it's got DSLRs in but it's also medium format!)
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Great tests!

    Would you be able to include stress tests of dynamic range in the future? I have seen lots of claims that the 4x5 or 8x10 can do a better job in dynamic range but I strongly doubt it. My guess would be that in terms of dynamic range (shadow SNR for pixel peeping)

    D810 = IQ250 > D800E = A7R > IQ180 > 8x10 > 4x5

    Just curious to see the facts.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Thanks for posting.
    If I read it correctly, Henning found that the Imacon 949 / X5 to resolve colour film at up to 100l/pm. I'm thinking that this is when scanning 35mm film at the high resolution, 8000dpi, not MF film which the 949 scans at 3200dpi? Even so, that's pretty impressive results.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    People get to very different results on film resolution because some only count "grain-free" resolution, and others what the film actually resolve through the grain. Quite visible in the images above the digital wins the grain-free contest and film wins if grain is allowed.

    The "grain-free resolution" has been the standard to compare with film as there's been an interest to give the advantage to digital, and with that I recall most thought that the P45+ was the breaking point where 4x5" film was matched or exceeded. But in terms of actual resolved resolution past the grain 4x5" does much more than that as seen in Tim's comparison.

    When it comes to dynamic range, negative film can hold lots of stops, yes more than a Sony CMOS. I've seen tests on it but don't have any link for the moment. Slide film is more limited, but more than one may think can be extracted from the shadows with special scanning techniques. Anyway, slide film is due to its strong contrast curve not the film to use if one intends to do a lot of tonemapping style of post-processing, color negative is then much more suitable as it's lower contrast and thus easier to scan.
    Last edited by torger; 18th December 2014 at 23:25.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    When it comes to dynamic range, negative film can hold lots of stops, yes more than a Sony CMOS. I've seen tests on it but don't have any link for the moment. <snip> if one intends to do a lot of tonemapping style of post-processing, color negative is then much more suitable as it's lower contrast and thus easier to scan.
    Here you go..


  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Great tests!

    Would you be able to include stress tests of dynamic range in the future? I have seen lots of claims that the 4x5 or 8x10 can do a better job in dynamic range but I strongly doubt it. My guess would be that in terms of dynamic range (shadow SNR for pixel peeping)

    D810 = IQ250 > D800E = A7R > IQ180 > 8x10 > 4x5

    Just curious to see the facts.
    For dynamic range I think you'd have to put 8x10 and 5x4 first if you use Portra 400...

    This is an old comparison and not particular great scans but I took an OM10 and brackets 10 shots in one stop steps. The scene had a brightness range of 12 stops so in total that is 22 stops across this range. You're possibly losing a stop or two in the shadows so lets call it 20 stops of dynamic range. See the photograph below for a photographic example.

    http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static...compensate.jpg



    The highlights and shadows get noisy but there is still signal across the whole range...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    That looks about right to my eyes. The big difference comes if you compare at 400 or faster, where film falls apart faster than digital.

    I love film and the DR was a big issue for me shooting in very high contrast settings. That said, the 14 stops of Sony FF is much easier to exploit and get looking good than making a similarly good print from film. Absolute potential and field exploitation are two different things. There is also no doubting that well executed film just looks better (IMHO) - period.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by timparkin View Post
    For dynamic range I think you'd have to put 8x10 and 5x4 first if you use Portra 400...

    This is an old comparison and not particular great scans but I took an OM10 and brackets 10 shots in one stop steps. The scene had a brightness range of 12 stops so in total that is 22 stops across this range. You're possibly losing a stop or two in the shadows so lets call it 20 stops of dynamic range. See the photograph below for a photographic example.

    http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static...compensate.jpg



    The highlights and shadows get noisy but there is still signal across the whole range...
    You misunderstood me. I mean *PIXEL PEEPING*, with SNR taken into account, not just signal. When you have too much film grain, the details in shadow or highlight are overrun. I know that film has signal over a broad range of dynamic range but I bet the actually usable dynamic range (i.e. the part which gives you good SNR for pixel peeping) would be significantly less, and I bet that would be less than the Sony CMOS sensors (e.g. D800E). I want to see when shooting backlight landscape, i.e. direct sun without cloud, how much detail (by pixel peeping) you can see from the foreground. You could give whatever optimal exposure to the film you want. I had a thread obsessed with pixel peeping for high contrast scenes: http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-f...ilhouette.html

    A good example of backlight landscape is the sunset at Big Ben where an ND grad would cut the buildings and affect the pixel peeping on the building. Below is a picture taken by a Nikon D800, which is severely underexposed to preserve the highlight around the sun, because I have much confidence with the dynamic range of the Sony CMOS sensor:



    I continuously shot 60 underexposed frames of the same parameter, each at 100 ISO and 8 seconds (with an ND1000 filter):



    Then I batch process these 60 RAW files with the same brutal adjustments in post-processing:









    Below shows what to expect from the Sony CMOS sensor - even from a single RAW file the SNR in shadow is still pretty awesome, exceeding the medium format CCDs, and the Canon sensors, by a large margin:



    And here is the final output you could expect to get, with very high SNR after stacking 60 frames:



    My bet is that the Sony CMOS sensor can overwhelm any other technology (including 8x10, 4x5, IQ180 etc) for such high contrast scenes for pixel peeping everywhere in the picture even with inferior glasses.

    If you are interested in accepting a challenge please give me a call and I will bring a Sony CMOS sensor (D800E or IQ250) to compare side by side against your 8x10, with whatever optimum exposure you can get from it. Remember that the challenge here is about pixel peeping (with SNR taken into account), not just signal. Feel free to scan it towards any resolution beyond the Sony CMOS sensor - let's see which has got more details for pixel peeping!

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    You can also stack film images, so that doesn't really get us any further.
    Carsten - Website

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    550
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    So if you take 60 shots, you get more DR than if you take one? Probably true for film too.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    You can also stack film images, so that doesn't really get us any further.
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    So if you take 60 shots, you get more DR than if you take one? Probably true for film too.
    I propose a comparison between single exposure. However I would also accept any challenge based on stacking - I am confident that stacking of film is a lot less practical when the cloud is moving fast. Keep in mind that a Nikon D800E can do timelapse inside the camera body, or do 5 fps continuous shots (each exposure 8 seconds), so that any discontinuity caused by movement of cloud is marginal in the final output.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    I propose a comparison between single exposure. However I would also accept any challenge based on stacking - I am confident that stacking of film is a lot less practical when the cloud is moving fast. Keep in mind that a Nikon D800E can do timelapse inside the camera body, or do 5 fps continuous shots (each exposure 8 seconds), so that any discontinuity caused by movement of cloud is marginal in the final output.
    OK I'll do that test.. the same scene shot on 10x8 and the Sony A7R .. I'll even bracket the A7R.

    What sort of scene do you want?

    Tim

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    p.s. You blew the highlights on your sun scene... Not an issue I'm sure but still...

    I'll even print the test shots out for a final comparison..

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by timparkin View Post
    p.s. You blew the highlights on your sun scene... Not an issue I'm sure but still...

    I'll even print the test shots out for a final comparison..
    The films pals always criticise about a blownout sun that is less than 1% area of the whole picture

    I would prefer a scene similar as the Big Ben during sunset so pixel peeping can be done on the texture of buildings. Long exposure would be appreciated as well if you have time I could visit your store after Christmas? Cheers!

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    The films pals always criticise about a blownout sun that is less than 1% area of the whole picture

    I would prefer a scene similar as the Big Ben during sunset so pixel peeping can be done on the texture of buildings. Long exposure would be appreciated as well if you have time I could visit your store after Christmas? Cheers!
    Oh come on - we're talking dynamic range and it's not just the sun it's the water too.. And I was being facetious ;-)

    As for long exposure, what do I do if a boat is going past, presumably that's multiple exposure out of the question?

    Tim

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    The films pals always criticise about a blownout sun that is less than 1% area of the whole picture

    I would prefer a scene similar as the Big Ben during sunset so pixel peeping can be done on the texture of buildings. Long exposure would be appreciated as well if you have time I could visit your store after Christmas? Cheers!
    Sorry I missed the bit about "my store after Christmas?" - can you enlighten me?

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Here's another example of a single frame 5x4 shot using Portra 400. About 16-17 stops between the highlights on the clouds and the deep shadow.

    Flare gets to be a problem with this amount of dynamic range but modern large format lenses cope pretty well..


  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by timparkin View Post
    Sorry I missed the bit about "my store after Christmas?" - can you enlighten me?
    I read your articles before and I thought that you had a store for drum scanning service... I am tempted to pay a visit if you had spare time, so we could elaborate the comparison

    Bracketing has its limitations as you mentioned e.g. a boat moving into the frame during a long exposure (that is not long enough to ignore the boat), so that's why I suggested multisampling (temporal noise reduction) with the IMX094 Sony CMOS sensor (e.g. D800E with interval timer shooting / A7R with Timelapse app).

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    I read your articles before and I thought that you had a store for drum scanning service... I am tempted to pay a visit if you had spare time, so we could elaborate the comparison

    Bracketing has its limitations as you mentioned e.g. a boat moving into the frame during a long exposure (that is not long enough to ignore the boat), so that's why I suggested multisampling (temporal noise reduction) with the IMX094 Sony CMOS sensor (e.g. D800E with interval timer shooting / A7R with Timelapse app).

    No store.. I just own/operate a few high end scanners. I can charge low prices because I don't have a 'store'.

    I'm up near York so it would be difficult to meet up with the 10x8 (unless you're up this way) but I'd be happy to run a test that you'd be satisfied with. It would be good to do a night shot with lights etc.. Perhaps York cathedral would be good.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    127
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by timparkin View Post
    No store.. I just own/operate a few high end scanners. I can charge low prices because I don't have a 'store'.

    I'm up near York so it would be difficult to meet up with the 10x8 (unless you're up this way) but I'd be happy to run a test that you'd be satisfied with. It would be good to do a night shot with lights etc.. Perhaps York cathedral would be good.
    still happy to meet up if you fancy it?

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by timparkin View Post
    still happy to meet up if you fancy it?
    Definitely ! will PM details soon

  22. #22
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    What's the point of pixel peeping? Print very large, and I mean very, very large, and it's a totally different comparison.

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    455
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    I didn't think the comparison is so much about pixel resolution per se, but dynamic range.

  24. #24
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by richardman View Post
    I didn't think the comparison is so much about pixel resolution per se, but dynamic range.
    Ah... one of those "my camera is bigger than yours" comparisons? I should have understood. Sorry for my misplaced comment. I'm mostly into photography

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    455
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    I don't know what you are reading, but the Mamiya 7 is smaller than most tech cam+back :-) Anyway, it's not my comparison. I don't have a tech cam or MFDB. Whatever.

  26. #26
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    No no... you misunderstood. I was referring to the rather pointless DR comparison. Isolating one aspect of photography and comparing it across media makes little sense in the grand scheme of things. When it comes to very high resolution photos, which was the starting point of the thread anyway, the only thing that matters is the final print. As for the 7, it's the superior solution among "compact" cameras as long as low ISO film can be used. Sorry if I complicate things

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    455
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 36 Megapixels vs 67 Velvia

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    No no... you misunderstood. I was referring to the rather pointless DR comparison. Isolating one aspect of photography and comparing it across media makes little sense in the grand scheme of things. ..
    Ah, we *know* it's the person behind the camera that matters, so in the grand scheme of things, St. Ansel would have made better landscape photos with a Instamatics than most mortals using the IQ280

    Anyway, to me it's a harmless fun. If I save hard enough, I could probably get a Mamiya 7 within 3-4 months, but "never" a MFDB, so... :-)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •