200%
200%
Before anyone says that this was not set-up as an accurate test, please note: this wasn't a test, it was part of a real world job in which I happened to be using both a scanning back and a DSLR. It's just a coincidence that these chairs matched up so closely -and over two devices. Still, the comparison is worth consideration. Look at these images: both come straight from the capture device, both contain an identical number of pixels, and both render a nearly identical subject under almost identical lighting; however, one shows far better detail than the other... why? Maybe because the raw DSLR pixel data required intense processing before it could even be seen on a monitor, so right from the start, the pixel quality had been compromised. Pixel quality really matters!
I'm not bashing the DSLR, I was using one for this job and the quality was fine; in fact, for many imaging purposes, the difference shown above would hardly be noticeable. But when serious imaging techniques push pixels to the limit, or when the demand is for ultimate imaging flexibility, you need clean, complete raw data right from the start, because from there, it's all downhill.
I'm not bashing the DSLR, I was using one for this job and the quality was fine; in fact, for many imaging purposes, the difference shown above would hardly be noticeable. But when serious imaging techniques push pixels to the limit, or when the demand is for ultimate imaging flexibility, you need clean, complete raw data right from the start, because from there, it's all downhill.
Back
Bayer Array Sensor
100% file size
100% file size
Back to 1st page
Tri-Linear Sensor
100% file size
100% file size
