>>4407515>>4407591>>4407667You are a fucking retard.
If you were to take the same machining tolerances and apply them to a part double or triple the overall size, you would reduce the deviation from spec overall as a percentage.
>ie if a 30cm ruler is made 1mm too long it's 3% out of spec, if a 100cm ruler is 1mm too long it's only 1% outWith their longer focal lengths and smaller apertures, even things like lense tilt and dof not covering less-than-perfectly-flat film are minimised on MF, not exacerbated.
The "MF look" is that of simply using a longer focal length lense on a larger image plane; ie less enlargement is required to get to the final printing/viewing size. All of the usual defects in image making are minimised (in theory) because you're magnifying them less. That includes the appearance of film grain, lense abberations, dust, diffraction, etc.
In actual practise, the best modern lenses on very low grain/noise modern films/sensors can replicate the results of larger formats on smaller ones.
>snoy 50/1.2 GM on a 60mp sensorvs
>90mm f/3.5 tessar on 6x9After enlarging to match you've almost certainly still got a cleaner, sharper image with just as shallow a dof on the snoy; it's really only the intangibles like film colours and grain (technical defects which we're trying to minimise, but that do actually increase the appeal of the image in the end) that you're missing with the newer kit.
