I'm not quite sure what to make of this. The D200 is one of the highest resolution cameras on the market in APS or 35mm format, but it's not a "full frame" Hasselblad with a digital back. I'm sure I can convert a D200 RAW file into something that's 50MB, but the file itself is about 16MB. The D200 is 10MP, Hasselblad just introduced a top-of-the-line 39MP camera, I doubt you'll find anything that's 50MP.
I guess the real question is "would a scan of a 35mm slide be sufficient?" If the answer is "yes" then a 10MP camera like the D200 is frequently reviewed as having comparable or better resolution than 35mm film.
I believe that they will be looking for a tiff file at 50Mb. An uncropped image from the D200 comes in around 48Mb (off the top of my head) once it is converted to a 16-bit tiff. You can ask if this is good enough, if not it is only a slight up-res to 50Gb.
Always look on the bright side of life de dum de dum........... :) :) :) Dave C Scottish Nikonian My Gallery
>Hi, > >I believe that they will be looking for a tiff file at 50Mb. >An uncropped image from the D200 comes in around 48Mb (off >the top of my head) once it is converted to a 16-bit tiff. >You can ask if this is good enough, if not it is only a >slight up-res to 50Gb. > >Good luck!
And 50Gb would allow you to print large enough to cover your local skyscraper!
As the others say - TIFF uncompressed should be fine...
I guess what you want to know is can you submit to image libraries. Short answer - yes. Getty - probably the most selective - now want the camera to be a D200, a D2x, a 5D or a 1DsMkII. Check library requirements - generally they want 8 bit RGB interpolated (the most common way is PhotoShop bicubic) to 50 MB.
Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.