Remember the Megapixel Wars*? When each new camera model from the major manufacturers with the megapixel count jacked up to overtop their compettors. And CHOICE magazine jumping up and down on the side urging the fight...
Well, it's set to break out again to the glory of the art and the delight of the accountants. You may officially watch this space for when we officially know what we are talking about...
In the meantime here is a look at the megapixel war of the past - the compact 35mm rangefinder camera vs the medium-format roll film camera. The Leica is the smaller one.
Both of the machines pictured are pocket-size, but you need different sized pockets. The Leica shoots wide angle on a 40mm lens and surprisingly so does the Fujifilm but with a longer lens. Less depth of field and more surface area of film emulsion to capture the scene.
How much more? 5800 sq mm vs 864 sq mm. 6.25 x the area and if they are looking at the same view that is far greater detail captured.
Cost per shot? $ 4.50 vs $ 2.06 at todays's prices. Makes you a very selective shooter...
How many megapixels in a 35mm slide - or a 6 x 9 slide? Apparently about 175 megapixels in the 35mm and one would assume 1093 megapixels. Thank goodness the air conditioner is on, because that just makes me sweat. And if the manufacturers of the digital cameras sit there and play with their calculators it should make them do so as well.
Now the game is over to you - the enthusiasts of Perth. What is the price/cost ratio per individual pixel for the finest grain slide film vs the yet-to-be-announced new cameras when amortized between the paradigm and the perforation. And does this apply going in the opposite fiscal direction? You may use scratch paper to do your calculations but do not remove this from the examination room.
* Watt Wars in the HiFi trade.
