>>4106784>I find ISO 3200 and 6400 to be very useful.>I like thinner DOF.Everything you said past this was bullshit and likely more related to the amount of money you spent, really.
>The differences are surprisingly small at the same MP. You need to go to a higher MP, ideally on a true 645 sensor, for MF to shineThis sounds familiar, doesn't it?
>That gets expensive fast. If you're making and selling very large prints...60" or more...it's worth it. It really does. Just admit MF wipes the floor with FF in the same way FF wipes the floor with APSC. It's suddenly nothing when you don't need it and can't afford it huh?
>Adox CMOS 20 is not betterIt is, more limited by the lens than the film.
>45-61mp FF sensors beat 6x9 Velvia 50 on a drumIt's actually physically impossible for a 61mp 35mm image to beat velvia 50 (80lp/in) shot at 6x9 and scanned at 6k DPI unless there was a gulf between the lenses or photographer error (a blurred shot is a blurred shot).
