digital-imaging-technology vs the Human Eye

[DEMDeepEllumMusic]

Comparing Digital Imaging Technology to the Human Eye

Bet a birds eye, say a hawk, is up to the equivalent of about a 400mm on a 35mm body.

[venchka]

They kinda sorta did, but they should have expressed dynamic range in terms we can all understand. I also disagree with the ISO and f/stop range.

For the time being, a well calibrated PAIR of eyeballs (a.k.a. 3-D) beats any recording device.

[Carl Stone]

Go to this page, and scroll down to the article "HDR sucks… most of the time"

Digital Photo Blog

This is an article written by a pro friend of mine, and it explains what we can actually see using our eyes.

[Dobick]

I disagree vehemently with the ISO assesment. If I take an image with a camera at ISO 800 at f/2 with the current level of light in my living room (lets say at 1/30) I will get a very dark image and would not be able to discern printing on a piece of paper as it will be too dark, but if I open my eyes and look around in that same room, I can easily make out all level of details.

Not sure what the equivalency would be but I would bet somewhere around 6400-25000