Since the beginning of digital time, photographers—and many manufacturers–have gotten confused over the differences between dots per inch (dpi) and pixels per inch (ppi). The terms are often interchanged—but they shouldn’t be, especially when it comes to describing printer or camera resolution. Why? A printer may use 6 or more dots (from individual color cartridges) to form the image of a single full-color pixel captured by a camera or scanner. This helps to explain why a digital file with 200 ppi res can be printed at 600-5400 dpi depending on the printer and its output settings.) Now it looks like we’ll have to add the way a camera or computer LCD monitor’s resolution is described to the never-ending saga of dots vs pixels.
Continue reading "Nikon Confusion over Dots vs. Pixels" »
When Canon introduced the 16.7 MP EOS 1Ds Mark II several years ago it became the first digital camera to offer image quality that exceeded that of 35mm film. To be fair, Pop Photo lab and field tests showed that it captured slightly less detail and resolution than a good ISO 100 color negative or slide film, while maintaining higher color accuracy and lower noise. When enlarged, EOS 1Ds Mark II images were clearly superior in side-by-side comparisons with images made from film, primarily due to the graininess of film that obscured detail at high magnification. So now that Canon has stepped up the pixel resolution on the new EOS 1Ds Mark III to 21.1MP, will the slight advantage that film had be gone altogether?
Continue reading "Canon EOS 1DS Mark III: a Medium Format Killer?" »
