RE: [at-l] photography equipment...

["L. Clayton Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>]

He pretty much told it to you like it is. I would add that weight is about
equal as well. Unless you buy one of the professional digital outfits with
external storage drives etc. Those start at around $7,000 and get heavy
quick.

Lee I Joe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-at-l@backcountry.net [mailto:owner-at-l@backcountry.net]On
> Behalf Of Bruce
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 8:48 PM
> To: at-l
> Subject: Re: [at-l] photography equipment...
>
>
> Regarding a couple of posts about photography equipment.
>
> Some of the new digital cameras support a megapixel format. However, the
> camera shop salesman, who sells both film and digital cameras, told me
> that the worst of 35 mm cameras are equivalent to about 7 million
> pixels. The most noticeable effect I saw in the digital samples was the
> stair stepping and dropout of thin angled lines such as a tree branch.
> Naturally, the effects are more noticeable when the picture is blown up
> to 8.5 x 11 or larger. If wallet size is all that is wanted, the picture
> quality of digital and 35 mm will be more nearly equal. The price range
> of the digitals range from $300 or cheaper to $15,000 or $20,000. Those
> top priced units probably produce pictures as good as a film camers. Any
> takers?
>
> Just info from one salesman. I am no expert, but am eyeing the digitals
> (the cheaper ones) and lightweight 35mm's.
>
> Stumblefoot
> Bruce Dreyer
> * From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *
>

* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================