Canon 1Ds M II (16 Mpixel digital) vs 4x5" film

[Bill]

This is an interesting article from a landscape photographer who uses
mainly 4x5" Velvia sheet film discussing why he's now using the Canon
1Ds MII for a lot of his work. While he concedes the 4x5 gives better
larger prints he discusses several other reasons why even 35 mm digital
is "good enough" for many things and better than film for workflow,
etc.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/1Ds-4x5.shtml

Bill

[Gregory]

I'd be more impressed if his colors were more realistic, less chalky
in separation & a little more realistic in color saturation. BTW his
assertion that the 4x5 is too slow is bogus- imop-maybe for the casual
user. Also I question the need for news worthiness of scenics. He's
creating the news so to speak by playing to the websites tastes.

[Roger Clark]

I have to say I have been operating very similarly for years.
I would rather get every image on 4x5 because of the amazing
detail. But 4x5 is not fast enough for many situations.
When I first started in 4x5, I always took a 35mm camera with me.
It was my light meter, and it ensured me plenty of backup
photos in case I didn't get the image on 4x5. While I always
got the image when I did have time to set up the 4x5,
I did mess up a lot of individual sheets, especially
when first learning ;-). But I haven't always gotten
to "the spot" in time to get the 4x5 set up with the best
light--so 35mm had to do. Now I carry a 1D Mark II as my
"light meter" and for images when I don't have time to
do 4x5, or the 4x5 is not appropriate (e.g. the grizzly
bear that suddenly becomes visible on the trail--I'm not
waiting to pull out the 4x5 and manually focus, then ask him
to freeze while I put in the film holder, pull dark slide,
and do the 1-second exposure at f/32! ;-).