I am not saying you need an expensive scanner to compete with a 6MP digital camera, I am asking if a very expensive 6MP digital camera can compete with film.
My objection to the original article was that the film had been scanned and the comparison was made between the image produced by a 6MP digital camera and the scanned film image, not an image made directly from the film to a wet darkroom print.
I suggested that test methodology using the scan was flawed. I suggest a better test would be to take an image of a test target that shows the resolving power and the edge sharpness of the 6MP digital camera and another image of the same target (possibly with the same lens) with a film camera. Print the digital image. Develop and print the film and then compare the number of line pairs resolved and the edge sharpness of the lines. This would give an objective evaluation.
I do not believe that a scanner, even a top of the line scanner, can extract all the information that is recorded on modern photographic film, nor do I believe that a 6MP digital camera is capable of capturing as much information as a film camera. This is not a matter of cost, it is matter of basic limitations.
I answered Mr. Reichmann on PHOTO.NET. Unfortunately, the moderator decided to delete Mr. Reichmann's original post and my response and that of others. I do not know why the PHOTO.NET moderator decided on this action; the discussion was civil, orderly, and addressed an interesting technical point.
I am glad it is time for you to go digital and wish you much success with you new equipment.