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?

Any comments? I considering APS for snapshots or digital!

Wlad

-- wladimir Schweigert (sgert@golden.net), August 08, 2000

Answers

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.

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.

-- Jim Strutz (jimstrutz@juno.com), August 08, 2000.

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.

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.

-- g.debord (gdebord@lycos.com), August 08, 2000.

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.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 08, 2000.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Wlad

-- wladimir Schweigert (sgert@golden.net), August 08, 2000.

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.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), August 08, 2000.

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.

-- Ron Gregorio (gregorio@ksc.th.com), August 09, 2000.