D100 vs. F5 plus Coolscan IV
With all the flash exposure problems and needing to send the D100 back to Nikon for firmware updates, why not buy an F5 and scan the negatives with a Nikon Film Scanner? I do that with my N 70 and the pictures at 5x7 look great. What's the advantage of the D100 other then instant gratification? In addition my Canon Powershot G2 takes flawless pictures with flash or ambient light without having to try to figure out exposure compensation.
#1. "RE: D100 vs. F5 plus Coolscan IV" | In response to Reply # 0MelT Registered since 06th Jul 2002Sat 28-Dec-02 07:22 PM
"Flawless" is in the mind of the beholder regardless what camera one may use. I personally think it is just a case of learning the equipment instead of something being wrong with equipment. This is just the opinion of someone who shoots a D1H and an F5 as well as having a Coolscan 4000.
#2. "RE: D100 vs. F5 plus Coolscan IV" | In response to Reply # 1Old Yeller Registered since 21st Dec 2002Sat 28-Dec-02 09:12 PM
I don't think you even need to spend the money on an F5 and coolscan to get better results than digital.
I've been doing extensive tests between my CP5000 and my old FE2. I use either Velvia or Provia 100F slide film scanned on one of the new Minolta Dimage Scan Dual III. The whole film set up would cost you about $1100 with body and three fast lens, including scanner. About the same cost as I'm selling all of my CP5000 stuff.
The simple fact is the film always looks better, at least sharper in prints. With large scale prints, film was far superior. Even for web resolution film was still less likey to blow out highlights and still render depth of detail in the shawdows better than my CP5000.
An interesting note is that I could manipulate the color of the digital prints in Photoshop a little, add a little more saturation, tweak the shadows and skys using layers and multiple exposures. I would then show the prints to people and they would pick the digital prints over the film every time. This just shows that resolution is not the sole factor in determining what makes a good print.
The ironic thing is I just ordered a D100 and I'm selling all of my CP5000 stuff. Busting out my old FE2 made me miss the creative freedom an SLR gives. It also showed me how bad/good my CP5000 is. Now I'm going to have to start my tests all over again!
You may ask why I ordered a D100 if film is so good and I have to be honest with you...waiting sucks! I want to the see the photos right now. I'll still use film for landscapes and such but for all my pro web work I'll stay digital. With digital I can go out on a photoshoot in the morning, come back and update the clients website and BILL them that afternoon.
If anyone is interested I could post some of the results of the tests I have done already.
Photoshop is one big party waiting to happen..
#3. "RE: D100 vs. F5 plus Coolscan IV" | In response to Reply # 2visual1 Registered since 19th Sep 2002Sun 29-Dec-02 12:04 AM
It really isn't a "simple" fact that film will always look better than digital. When I do posters for our commerial clients, we do the product shots with a Power Phase FX, <<100-300meg files>> output is normally about 4x 6 feet, to 6 x 10 feet. Scanned film up to 4x5 sheet film cannot touch the resolution or sharpness at these sizes. BUT I do agree that film printed on photographic material is superior to most digital output. Once you scan film, you take away the dynamic range advantage film has. So back to the point, I shoot digital with a digital workflow, and for me it has taken the place of film in most cases for me. If you would like to see some examples go to the "D100 or wait" thread.
#4. "RE: D100 vs. F5 plus Coolscan IV" | In response to Reply # 0
I have both set ups and do both. I defy anyone to tell the difference at my website, in my posts at Nikonians, or even in my prints up to 11x14. The truth is, people can't. I do not do 16x20 (but how many of us do?), so I can't comment on the comparison at that size.
I, too, would suggest a little more time with your D100 before you give up on it.
The only place I have seen a problem (which I have not been working on) is in skin tones when converting to b&w (D100). For now I have to give the advantage to the F5/Coolscan combo. But that is not fixed in stone and I will be working on it again in the near future.