simonpg
Active Member
In the last year or so, I have read MF digital imaging articles by Luminous Landscape writers about the image quality of high end digital backs.
Twice I have read the comment "image quality that beats a drum scanned 4x5 image"! Personally I doubt that, but I have no technical facts or user experience to make such a statement.
So, among those of you using high end MF digital backs, do you agree that say Phase One or Imacon's best actually produce image quality that equals or exceeds that from a drum scanned 4x5 film frame?
Over the years we read similar comments claiming that some 35mm full frame digital cameras produce images equal to or better than MF film images - a claim mostly argued against by experienced high end digital SLR users. So, is the claim about digital MF image quality true?
Twice I have read the comment "image quality that beats a drum scanned 4x5 image"! Personally I doubt that, but I have no technical facts or user experience to make such a statement.
So, among those of you using high end MF digital backs, do you agree that say Phase One or Imacon's best actually produce image quality that equals or exceeds that from a drum scanned 4x5 film frame?
Over the years we read similar comments claiming that some 35mm full frame digital cameras produce images equal to or better than MF film images - a claim mostly argued against by experienced high end digital SLR users. So, is the claim about digital MF image quality true?