Always gives you guys something to laugh about when a ignoramus dives in. I
have an engineering PhD as well but it's in Chem Eng from the 70's which I
guess makes my opinion worth as much that of the average taxi driver.
I had an Agfa 1680 for a while. 1.3 MP CCD and some fancy interpolation
that supposedly took it to equiv 1.9 MP. Dunno if I believed that. The
point was it did A4 prints that I considered fairly acceptable, although my
scanned neg stuff was a bit better. I have Kodak FD300 and HP S20 film
scanners. I know there are scanners that do APS and 35 but that's not the
way it happened for me. Both are 2400 dpi.
Have just upgraded to a Casio 3000 (3.3 MP). Also had the misfortune to be
followed home by a used Epson Stylus 3000 A2 printer. Printed some A2 stuff
off the digicam and it just blew me away. Orright orright it's not the same
as one would get off an MF neg and Sprintscan 4000 (I assume). Was pretty
damn good though - some pixelation visible when viewed from 10 cm (who
views this size print at from 10 cm anyway).
I know the dot arithmetic doesn't work. The digi pic is about the equiv of
a 1200 dpi 35mm neg scan. Blowing that out to A2 is a res on the paper of
about 100-odd dpi. Obviously totally unsatisfactory. I just have to tell my
eyes that .... :)
Have now been amusing self by copying slides on a light box using 5
diopters of closeup lens on the front of the zoom in macro mode. Purists
should feel free to faint. More pretty damn good results.
I would not be bothered in the least if someone sold me a pic of this
quality suitably printed on a matt paper perhaps under glass and framed up
nice.
Cheers Ian
