Well, I'd say film is dead, for colour 35mm anyway

After comparing Kodak's new Ektar 100 ISO against a D300's output, I can
definitely say, film just can't compete on most levels. It does have fine
grain, but you can see it, as opposed to invisible noise at 100 ISO out of
the digital. Colour is washed out compared to the digital and resolution
even using a good quality prime lens (Olympus 35mm f2.8 OM) against a zoom
on the Nikon is about half that of the digital. The film image does have a
certain look that might appeal to some, it's kind of hard to describe, but
from a technical quality standpoint, it just does not compare. I intend to
do some more comparisons, but I don't expect much change in the results.

Rich wrote:
After comparing Kodak's new Ektar 100 ISO against a D300's output, I can
definitely say, film just can't compete on most levels. It does have fine
grain, but you can see it, as opposed to invisible noise at 100 ISO out of
the digital. Colour is washed out compared to the digital and resolution
even using a good quality prime lens (Olympus 35mm f2.8 OM) against a zoom
on the Nikon is about half that of the digital. The film image does have a
certain look that might appeal to some, it's kind of hard to describe, but
from a technical quality standpoint, it just does not compare. I intend to
do some more comparisons, but I don't expect much change in the results.

Why do people like you find it so ****ing important that everyone "go
digital?" Why does the thought of someone being different fill you with
wildly irrational deep seated drread. Get over it. And while you're at
it, please STFU with the smug/neurotic film bashing.

Thanks!

"Rich" wrote in message
...
After comparing Kodak's new Ektar 100 ISO against a D300's output, I can
definitely say, film just can't compete on most levels. It does have fine
grain, but you can see it, as opposed to invisible noise at 100 ISO out of
the digital. Colour is washed out compared to the digital and resolution
even using a good quality prime lens (Olympus 35mm f2.8 OM) against a zoom
on the Nikon is about half that of the digital. The film image does have a
certain look that might appeal to some, it's kind of hard to describe, but
from a technical quality standpoint, it just does not compare. I intend
to
do some more comparisons, but I don't expect much change in the results.


Who asked?