Hi,
Yes you are right. Some folks love film and some have problems with it. I belong the latter category.
If we go back to the original posting the OP wants to make large prints, like 40x40 and ask for advise on weather MFDB is the route to take or not. Add to that he wants to make long exposures, which are problematic with DALSA based backs. The question is why he needs long exposures, I don't know. Film has a reciprocity failure so for light collection it is not very good, but if he needs long exposure for artistic reasons film may be a good option.
On the other hand, my experience is really that my 24MP digital equipment beats my 67 MF analogue equipment. The OP wants to print large, and from what I can see from my tests I have doubts that MF will print better than digital.
My experience is that I can make 70x100 cm prints from 67 Velvia, but also that it is a lot of effort. In square format that is only 27.5". I have not made larger print for practical reasons. I see at least three issues with film.
- Handling and development. Fine if you develop your self.
- Scanning equipment is expensive, and hard to find
- Scanning film is in no way easy
The other issue is that all my tests with film has really been a hassle:
1) Waiting for development
2) Velvia (which was my favorite film in my film days) is very hard to scan because of it's D-MAX
3) I have problems getting colors right
4) Drum scans are needed for best quality and they are expensive
The tests I posted describe my experience with film, based on the equipment I have. Most of the files are downloadable so anyone can check out the files and make their own conclusions. There are also two very high resolution drum scans included.
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/PublishedTests/index.htmlI was quite enthusiastic for MF film for a long time, and invested a lot in scanners and also a 6x7 projector, so I was seriously involved with MF analogue, but for me it lost out to digital.
Anyway, the original poster seems to test a Pentax 645D and seems happy, so the original question may have been solved. That is always a good thing.
Best regards
Erik
Just like there's more to the MFD vs. DSLR debate than megapixels, there's more to film vs digital than just resolution. I know you love to look at everything in a very scientific manner, measuring, counting pixels, making graphs and so on, but there's a look & feel to film that is different than digital. If said look & feel is something one appreciates is a different matter all together, but there's no doubt it's there. There's also an emotional aspect to it, some feel it's a huge pain in the ass to work with film, while others love it and feel more connected to the whole process than with digital. Anyway, my point is it's more complex than just numbers.