How many megapixels would it take to equal a 35mm film maximum quality?

3 Mp

Photographic quality does not only depend on the optic lens. An average 35mm lens can offer a clear photo with size of A4. To match this print with enough dpi to offer photographic quality, we need only about 3.2 megapixels DC. So, in common use, 3 megapixels is enough.

8 Mp

I don't agree with the last post. To equal a 35 mm MAXIMUM quality film, you need at least 8 megapixels.

3.4 Mp

I agree with the first: 3.4

3.2 Mp up to 8 x 10 size

OK - I bought a Nikon D70 at 6.1MP because I saw perfect 16X20 prints from an Amsterdam vacation trip that were as good as my best film images. It really put the fun back into photography for me. I do a lot of night photography during my vacations , I am a firm believer in shoot early and shoot late for best pictures. Digital clearly is superior for night work. Despite all the complaints about digital "noise" it is a lot better than the murky shadows that underexposed film gives.

I am confident that I can get a good 20X30 poster print comparable to my 35mm results. At smaller sizes up to 8X10 a good 3.2MP is fine. Film has a softer quality ,perhaps more gradation - but when working at my best settings and getting a 4MB jpeg I can work the image pretty well during printing to duplicate most film results. Zooming in yields more resolution up to about 40X when it breaks down.

It really depends on image size - digital breaks down in a nasty and unusable fashion when it reaches its limit. Film gradually gets crummier till you reach a blurry mess somewhere around 40X. Problem with film is camera shake - digital seems better to me in this regard. Digital seems to need more fill flash since it is easy to block up highlights - Nikon's D70 makes this a snap with a 1/500 flash sync!

I wish there were a pre-programmed setting that duplicated Kodachrome 25. You can make up a custom setting but I wish the camera had it built in. Color quality , perhaps depth of color?, is poor on the color prints I have made myself on an old Epson 600. You have to have a similar image from film to realize just how much better film is in this regard, and it is quite a bit. Nikon does not brag about color depth in their ads as it is only 12bit.

Perhaps something better is coming along, I'll bet it is!

12 Mp

If professional film stock delivers around 3000 dpi resolution then 35mm film (24mmx36mm) translates to around 12megapixels.

Make a negative from digital image

If you have a digital image that is good enough to enlarge to 4x5 and looks as good as an image from 35mm film, take that printed image to a good professional photo lab and ask to have a film negative of that image made to the same size as the image. At that point you can make just about any size image you wish from that negative, maybe even a billboard size. TIFF images at the maximum density capability of the camera will make the best enlarged printable images. Unfortunately TIFF images take up the most memory storage available to the camera.

4 Mp

There are many problems that digital cameras have that limit photo clarity, problems that film cameras typically don't have. To overcome these problems and various others, e.g., printer dpi, resolution loss, and data corruption, I would hesitate to compare a 3.41 megapixel camera to 35mm. I suggest more like 4meg cameras. The main problems with clarity that the average person has with a digital come from poor printer quality. To overcome this, use third-party printing of digital media. For instance, Walmart, Walgreens, or even your local supermarket. Many times the equipment to produce high quality images costs a lot of money. The average one-hour photo-lab equipment costs about 1.7 million dollars. Not all of that goes to digital prints, mind you, but a conservative estimate would be 35 thousand dollars or so.

11 Mp

At 3100 dpi, a 1.15 square inch area will have over 11 million dots -- 3100 squared times 1.15. (Furthermore, "mega" stands for million, so 3100 dots would be 0.0031 megapixels.) In conclusion, an average 35mm film has about 11 megapixels of resolution.

4 - 6 Mp

I agree with the first 3.4, but prefer any thing between 4 and 6 megapixel.

6 - 8 Mp

A 3 megapixel SLR will give better clarity than 35mm film at 8x10. The math may not add up, but print a photo and see the difference. At 6-8 megapixel you will get a 20x30 image vastly superior to 35mm film. I sold my EOS 1V's when the D60 came out. I can tell you now that if the difference in image quality were not huge there is no way I would have traded up from such magnificent 35mm bodies. Consider also that many pro photographers who would have never touched 35mm film, considering it not a pro option, are jumping onto digital.

At least 6 - 8 Mp, more to match good film

To equal what sort of film? Fuji Superia 800 or your average Kodak 800 speed garbage that is sold at K-Mart? A 6 to 8 MP camera will equal that for most purposes.

Fuji NPH160 or Reala 100? 20+ MP are needed.

For visual equivalent in a 4x6 print to 80-85% of the population? 2 to 3 MP are quite sufficient if the camera has a decent lens.

The biggest issue is that digital has really bad noise problems except for the very expensive full-frame sensors used in very high-end DSLR's, so you will see much more "noise" in the dark areas of low-light shots. Also, digital does poorly in situations where the exposure value varies a lot within the image.

First answer by Simon Chen. Last edit by Schnazola. Contributor trust: 1308 [recommend contributor]. Question popularity: 193 [recommend question]