View Single Post
  #19  
Old May 25th 07, 12:52 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.misc,alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.misc
frederick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,525
Default Film vs. digital cameras

DBLEXPOSURE wrote:
"Robert Peirce" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)"
wrote:

Robert Peirce wrote:

Digital would have a very long way to go to come close to 4x5 color
slides.
I haven't taken a 4x5 film image in over a year now.
I've replaced it with digital mosaics.

http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/large_mosaics

Impressive but probably beyond my ability. I have trouble stitching
panoramas together.

--
Robert B. Peirce, Venetia, PA 724-941-6883
bob AT peirce-family.com [Mac]
rbp AT cooksonpeirce.com [Office]



Impressive indeed. From time to time one finds a jewel amongst all the NG
noise. Off to research Panoramic tripod heads, great, more gear to spend
$$ on.

Patrick Ziegler
www.imagequest.ifp3.com


To potentially save some $$, then consider whether just positional
accuracy (ie rotating the camera around the entrance pupil of the lens),
or whether you need stability to prevent camera shake for longer
exposures as well as positional accuracy.
Something like the panosaurus head (google for it online) is quite
inexpensive, or it's not so hard to make your own.
Something to provide good stability as well, will be expensive and may
not be what you really need.