APS sharper than 35

[wladimir_schweigert]

Is APS sharper than 35? A relative visiting from Germany took pictures with a Canon zoom APS and they are sharper than my 35 pics from a Yashica compact 35 with that venerable Zeis 35mm. That Yashica has kruined some of my pics from my trip to Argentina and I feel I will take a hammer and give that litle plastic marvel a good "jammer." I needed my leica to show that my pics are good and sharp and I read somewhere APS being sharper because of the film base being thinner?

 

<p>

 

Any comments? I considering APS for snapshots or digital!

 

<p>

 

Wlad

[jim_strutz]

The film base is stiffer, so, in theory, it should lay flatter on the

film rails. This would be more of an issue with very fast optics

with their very small depth of field. I doubt that it has much

effect with the glass they put in front of point & shoot cameras.

 

<p>

 

When APS was launched several years ago, both Kodak and Fuji came out

with new technology and new emulsions for the new film format. Both

said that pictures from the new APS films were just as sharp as the

slightly larger 35mm films that they had out at the time. Since then

that new stuff has been included into the current crop of 35mm

films. The general opinion is that APS is less sharp than 35mm.

I've seen comparisons in magazines that confirm that as well, but the

difference isn't that much.

[g._debord1]

I would not leap to conclusions by blaming the film format

immeadiately! It is entirely possible that A) there is something wrong

with your 35mm, B) the aps camera tested has a "better" lens or focus

system than the 35mm, C) the machine at the lab that printed the APS

was better calibrated/newer/better serviced or had a more skilled

person person running it than the machine that printed the 35mm, D) the

magnetic information strip on the APS film allowed the APS printer to

make critical adjustments in the exposure of the print --- 35mm has no

such info strip and so machine prints from a 35mm film are made with

the machine using less info on how to print the individual negatives,

E) your relative doesn't care for coffee and you drink 4 cups before

photographing so their hands are steadier than yours, F) Your lab

overdeveloped your 35mm negatives (I have found even a slight

overdevelopment radically increases grain and decreases apparent

sharpness in some of the films I use), G) You use ISO 800 film and your

relative uses ISO 50 film, H)The lens of your 35mm wass dirty and the

lens of your relative's APS was clean....and the list goes on.<p>

Personally I will not use APS because I already have results from 35mm

that please me and some of the films I prefer are not availible in APS.

Also, APS film is more expensive to buy and send to the lab - my 35mm

b&w I can process and print myself in a friend's darkroom. If you can

afford it, buy an APS and shoot side by side with your Yashica and see

which you prefer and then sell the one you don't like on eBay.<p>

[andrew_schank]

That isn't the experience I have had. I haven't seen anything taken

with an APS camera that compares to a good 35mm shot in sharpness,

color saturation, and grain. The negs are only 1/2 the size of 35mm,

and that is too much real estate to make up.

[wladimir_schweigert]

Thanks to all who answered. Here is the latest info I have: APS is

designed for snappers and in order to atract and keep these segment

they developed a new tech. in camera and printing: thinner film base

to avoid image difusion, magnetic info for auto printing machines,

new emulsions for good color/grain etc. And it appears to work.

 

<p>

 

I bought the yashica T4 to take snapshots and if needed, use the pics

for other purposes (exhibit, publish etc.). I thought it to be a

decent camera and either it is junck or it is a lemon. There a

features missing: exposure comp. and now I realize: manual override

for focusing because its zone focusing is not at all good compared to

the particular APS a compared it to.

 

<p>

 

I thing it is quite OK to randomly evaluate two diff. systems when

all you want is to load a film, have it developed and presto. Since I

have printed a good number of rolls with my yashica, I think I can

say it stinks.

 

<p>

 

I will grant you al that you can take a Leica shot into a crammy

developing place and get junk. It happened to me. Even some so-called

custom place, the printing sucks. But the Yashica is a goner.

 

<p>

 

I will save and get a Minilux with a zoom or a Contax. Or APS!

 

<p>

 

Wlad

[andrew_schank]

Sorry you got a bad T4. A friend of mine also got one that couldn't

take a sharp picture. Mine is very good--its an older one. I wonder

if they cheapened them up in the latest series, or if I just got

lucky. One thing about the APS cameras, is that because of the

negative size being about 1/2 of 35mm, the cameras have more depth of

field per angle of view than 35mm. This makes it a lot less critical

on the focus. Before you buy an APS camera, try to make an 8 X 10 or

worse, and 11 X14 from a shot taken with one.

[ron_gregorio]

Sorry to hear about your Yashica. I don't have any problems with

mine, but I did have focusing problems initially. Just make sure

that you pre-focus your subject and that you use fast films (i.e.

400ASA). This camera is susceptible to shaking, thus causing image

blur.