If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
"Stormin Mormon" wrote:
My little Lumix ... prints equal to my 35 MM ... usually take still pics 0.3 mb Er, that's 320 x 200 pix. I would really like to know what '35 MM' camera you have. -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote in message m... "Stormin Mormon" wrote: My little Lumix ... prints equal to my 35 MM ... usually take still pics 0.3 mb Er, that's 320 x 200 pix. I would really like to know what '35 MM' camera you have. -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com I was wondering the same thing myself. I have a crappy 300Kpixel (0.3Mpixel) camera that I got for box tops (well, not box tops, rather the barcodes from cigarette packs), and it really and truely sucks! OTOH, I often make 11x14 and 16x20 prints from my 35mm negs, and if the negs were shot correctly (good exposure, focus, and held steady). the prints can be very good. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
Couple of them. I mostly use the Olympus Trip 40, point and shoot. With
flash, takes two AA cells. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote in message m... "Stormin Mormon" wrote: My little Lumix ... prints equal to my 35 MM ... usually take still pics 0.3 mb Er, that's 320 x 200 pix. I would really like to know what '35 MM' camera you have. -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
The camera says it's 7.something megapixel, so it does fairly good pics. I
do use more megabytes for group photos, and once in a while when I'm fairly sure I've got a memorable moment. For snap shots of the neighborhood, kids, dogs, etc, 0.3 makes reasonable pics. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Ken Hart1" wrote in message news:yZ1vk.254$Wd.15@trnddc01... I was wondering the same thing myself. I have a crappy 300Kpixel (0.3Mpixel) camera that I got for box tops (well, not box tops, rather the barcodes from cigarette packs), and it really and truely sucks! OTOH, I often make 11x14 and 16x20 prints from my 35mm negs, and if the negs were shot correctly (good exposure, focus, and held steady). the prints can be very good. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
For sure, the mega pixel rating is a bit more than 0.3.
I had a camera from Ebay, which was 1.3 MP, and that took miserable pics. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Scott W" wrote in message ... But I do have to point out that 0.3MB is not the same as 0.3MP. Depending on the content of the image you can get a good looking 8x12 inch print from 0.3MB, but from 0.3MP not a chance. Scott |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
You would, then, be mistaken in your thoughts.
-- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Jim" wrote in message ... My little Lumix ... prints equal to my 35 MM ... usually take still pics 0.3 mb I think he means 0.3 megapixels. That means a 640*480 pixel image. Still way too small for recent or even decade old monitors and with the cheap cost of memory cards these days, taking small pictures like that will only lead to regret in the future, if not already. Jim www.inghamcam.info |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
Stormin Mormon wrote:
The camera says it's 7.something megapixel, so it does fairly good pics. I do use more megabytes for group photos, and once in a while when I'm fairly sure I've got a memorable moment. For snap shots of the neighborhood, kids, dogs, etc, 0.3 makes reasonable pics. Perhaps 0.3 Mb is the size of the jpg. file. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
That's the setting I use. However, my windows computer says most of the pics
are about 0.150 MB. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Marvin" wrote in message news_cvk.353$393.331@trnddc05... Perhaps 0.3 Mb is the size of the jpg. file. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
35mm film VS digital
"Stormin Mormon" wrote:
The camera says it's 7.something megapixel, so it does fairly good pics. I do use more megabytes for group photos, and once in a while when I'm fairly sure I've got a memorable moment. For snap shots of the neighborhood, kids, dogs, etc, 0.3 makes reasonable pics. You do realize that you are talking apples and oranges? Size of a sensor in megapixel and size of a generated JPEG file are two very different things. A camera with 0.3 MPixel would make photos with a truly lousy resolution. Learn more about Jesus Learn more about digital photography: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...olution_01.htm http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...ression_01.htm jue |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
35mm film vs Digital..what is the difference? | Marion | 35mm Photo Equipment | 252 | January 3rd 07 12:08 AM |
35mm Film vs Digital again | Graham Fountain | 35mm Photo Equipment | 23 | December 22nd 05 04:45 AM |
Digital images to 35mm slide film | Malevil | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | March 13th 05 06:07 AM |
35mm film vs digital | Conrad Weiler | Digital Photography | 49 | January 5th 05 04:01 AM |
Developing 35mm film into digital | Stuart Droker | Film & Labs | 1 | September 20th 04 04:15 PM |