...BJL is an absolute whiz on this sort of thing .
With flattery like that, I have to comment; but actually I have undergone a "conversion" to an obsession with print viewing, and a scepticism about numbers except when the numerical differences are so large that their implications for print quality are unambiguous.
What I like to do now, and recommend, is to seek out high quality photographic prints of the type and size one aspires to, produced using the relevant camera (here the 10D) and then prepared and printed with skill and care, as would be done with a traditional "chemical" exhibition print.
P. S. I did a casual comparison of this kind between the Olympus E-20 and 35mm Kodak transparency films, by comparing different books in the "Day in the Life of ..." series, where the film/sensor choice is set by sponsorship. My casual conclusion was that, as one moves closer, the film photos start to show weaknesses first, with grain showing at distances where digital noise is still invisible. However, getting closer, the E-20 photos start to look the worst, because once visible, the noise is more colorful and distracting ("TV style confetti" versus "film soot"). Resolution tended to be the last problem, usually only an issue at closer viewing than needed to see grain or noise.