The answer to yesterday’s puzzle<\/i>.<\/p>\n
At the conclusion of the previous journal entry, I asked readers to determine whether film or digital was used to record the eight images included.<\/p>\n
Here are the technical data for the pictures:<\/p>\n
Image #1: Canon 350D, 17-85 Canon at 75mm (120mm equivalent), 1\/50, f\/7.1, ISO 100
\nImage #2: Canon 5D, 200mm Canon, 1\/2000, f\/4.5, ISO 200
\nImage #3: Canon 5D, 24-105 Canon at 58mm, 1\/500, f\/4, ISO 400
\nImage #4: Canon 5D, 24-105 Canon at 35mm, 1\/250, f\/5.6, ISO 250
\nImage #5: Canon 5D, 24-105 Canon at 73mm, 1\/350, f\/6.7, ISO 200
\nImage #6: Canon 5D, 24-105 Canon at 28mm, 1\/6 (hand held and IS used big time!), f\/4, ISO 800
\nImage #7: Canon 5D, 15mm Canon fisheye with ImageAlign used to ‘defish’ the picture (12mm equivalent), 1\/750, f\/8, ISO 400
\nImage #8: Panasonic Lumix LX-1, 6.3-25.2 Leica at 14mm (63mm equivalent), 1\/1250, f\/4, ISO 100<\/p>\n
In other words, not a roll of film in sight. Properly exposed and processed digital is indistinguishable from properly exposed and processed film until the ISO gets over 200, in which case the Canon 5D beats film hands down every time.<\/p>\n
All pictures processed (very little) in Apple’s Aperture.<\/p>\n
How did you do?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The answer to yesterday’s puzzle. At the conclusion of the previous journal entry, I asked readers to determine whether film or digital was used to record the eight images included. Here are the technical data for the pictures: Image #1: Canon 350D, 17-85 Canon at 75mm (120mm equivalent), 1\/50, f\/7.1, ISO 100 Image #2: Canon … Continue reading Film or Digital<\/span>