I asked a [question][1] a while ago here about the "sweet spot" of a lens, which led to a really interesting discussion of "sharpness", the physics of light, and general image quality.

1st Question
------------

In the film world, larger format films are known for providing a certain quality of sharpness, dynamic range, and fidelity that surpass the smaller formats.

The end result is clearly noticeable, but difficult to describe.

**In the digital world, do larger sensors provide the same advantages over their smaller counterparts as larger format film did to theirs?**

Clarification Of The Question, and Caveats (*please read*)
----------------------------------------

- This question is for current DSLRs only, so disregard "medium format" hasselblad type sensors or experimental sensors.

- The question says "***all other things equal***", so please disregard the idea of *"it's not the tool, it's the photographer*", or "*it's all about the lenses and the glass*".

- I know "sharpness" and "image quality" are problematic notions, especially when trying to measure them. Please try and think about the relationship of film sizes, and apply those to the question.

2nd Question
--------------------------

I traditionally shoot with film, and love it's "quality". But I want to upgrade from my digital Nikon, my D50.

With the first question in mind, will I "gain" that high fidelity image quality from the D700, or will the newer D7000 suffice (in case size doesn't matter, and the tech is newer after all)

cheers!



  [1]: https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/2917/how-do-you-find-out-the-sweet-spot-of-a-lens