5 Jul
2011
5 Jul
'11
1:48 p.m.
You'd need an awfully high-res sensor to do that!
Back-of-envelope
arithmetic:
If you want something equivalent to scanning a 10.5x8 page at 400dpi,
you need 3200 pixels across a (portrait) page.
The 1978 BA11-K fiche I have in front of me is a low-magnification (by
DEC standards one, and it's 16 pages across, but they're landscape
format pages, so that works out to 10.5 x 400 x 16 = 67,000 pixels wide,
and therefore the sensor would have to be about 67,000 x 48,000 =
3,216,000,000 pixels. Thats 3216 megapixels.
What is the resolution of the digital 5*4 backs that I am told are now
avaialble? I susepct rather less than that,.
Why isn't it suitable for lining up? It's a
reflex -- so WYSIWYG. I
could understand that it might be hard to get at the eyepiece when it's
all set up, but you could try getting an angle finder attachment. The
Does any digitla SLR have interchanable finders like my Exakta, Nikon F,
etc film cameras?
Seagull ones aren't "insanely great"
quality compared to genuine Pentax
ones (for example) but they're easily good enough for alignment, and cheap.
Since the optical quality here has no effect on the final image, it's the
srt of thing yoy can have a go at making from odd lenses, prisms, etc.
-tony