Richard Kriz , Jul 21, 2008; 09:02 p.m.
I currently have 2 Elan II 35mms.. I use one body for color and one for B/W so I don't have to waste film
rewinding mid-roll. I have (all Canon USM) two zooms and a 100mm macro. My shooting usually includes portraits,
fine art and found still lifes...in either color or B/W. I'd like to produce high quality prints up towards the
16x20 range and am not too confident in the resolution of 35mm format...even when using my 100mm macro prime lens.
I'm teetering on the fence between 2 things: utilizing my current lenses and getting my first DSLR (Rebel XSI) or
be an old fashioned purist and get a Mamiya 645 or RZ67. I know that MF film can be drum scanned and/or processed
into the 16x20 range without a problem (except waiting on the pro lab to get to my order). My experience with
digital has only been with a P&S...not to mention that I have zero experience with Photoshopping anything. Which
way should I swing? I'll have around $800-$1000 to play with. Thanks in advance for all the help!
scott thompson , Jul 21, 2008; 09:09 p.m.
I have had my XSi for about 3 weeks now, coming from a P7S Kodak before that, and a Pentax K1000 film before
that. I didn't have hardly any experience withPhotoshop(still don't) and have excellent results with the camera. I love
it and sure you would too! Here are a few examples
[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/motox424/Framed711.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/motox424/FramedBraidyHouhgton.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/motox424/IMG_0476-1.jpg[/IMG]
scott thompson , Jul 21, 2008; 09:10 p.m.
Sorry --forgot to change to HTML format for the pics
[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/motox424/Framed711.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/motox424/FramedBraidyHouhgton.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/motox424/IMG_0476-1.jpg[/IMG]
Adam Gifford , Jul 21, 2008; 09:12 p.m.
I've printed 16x20's from my older digital rebel (300d) which is only 6mp. I'm sure the XSI will do just fine at 16x20.
The Digital SLR cameras produce a much less noisy picture than a p&s so they can be enlarged a lot more than the equivalent megapixel p&s camera.
scott thompson , Jul 21, 2008; 09:13 p.m.
Tom Weis , Jul 21, 2008; 09:21 p.m.
Richard, bite the bullet a get a good second-hand 5D. You won't regret it.
Richard Kriz , Jul 21, 2008; 09:42 p.m.
Tom: why the 5D...better metering? I'm not after umpteen frames per second.
Everyone: thanks for the advice and effort so far!
Derrick deHaan , Jul 21, 2008; 09:57 p.m.
The 5D is a full frame sensor camera. Coming from film, it may be a much easy transition for you and your past with your lenses. You field of view will remain basically the same with the 5D.
Derrick
Louis Meluso 
, Jul 21, 2008; 10:13 p.m.
Richard, your question has deeper implications beyond digital vs film. The way you work with a behemoth like an RZ-67 is quite different than any 35mm camera. The MF sytem is heavy and slow to work with. Not great for fast action or light travel. The 35mm camera has a greater range of optics and accessories available. For the fine art approach, where large prints are desired with a slower, more considered way of working, the RZ67 produces stellar images for a reasonable investment. Negs can be printed optically or scanned to provide for a high quality hybrid workflow. Either way it's useful to become aware of current imaging tools and processes.
Tom Weis , Jul 21, 2008; 10:14 p.m.
Richard, yes what Derrick said. The Rebel 1.6x crop will drive you nuts. If you appreciate medium format quality you will
love 5D RAW files. I know you will have to learn all this stuff, but it's worth it in my opinion. Yes there will be a 5D
replacement *soon* (whatever that means), but it will cost twice what a second-hand 5D will, and the 5D is no slouch.
