Simon Worby wrote:
>Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
>
>>Development of DSLRs is already slowing down. In the space of
>>about 5 years they went from 1.3MP up to 6MP. Ones that people
>>can afford are just beginning to edge toward 8MP after being
>>stuck at 6MP for almost 3 years. I think that the 20D, eVolt
>>and the not yet introduced Nikon equivalent will not be
>>significantly bested in image quality for at least 4 or 5 years.
>>
>>
>
>Re: MP numbers. I think they could do a lot more quickly if they so
>chose. But 6MP gives a very decent picture, and the 2MP increases are
>enough to keep people constantly upgrading to new kit, so why would they
>want to change that? As with many items, it becomes a status symbol to
>have the latest and greatest, and then all folk have to do is to
>convince themselves they NEED that extra 2MP. That's easy of course.
>Convincing the wife (or husband) is perhaps more difficult!
>
Well, I generally don't subscribe to conspiracy theories. I don't
disagree with you take on the thinking of marketers and buyers. On the
other hand, I think it is actually difficult to raise MP counts without
increasing noise and other negative effects and that improvements are
coming to market pretty much as fast as they can be made economically
viable.
>But it's not just down to MPs. AIUI one of the main "issues" with DSLRs
>they need to overcome is shutter lag. And then there's the time it takes
>to save to disk. Advances in access speed of both volatile and
>non-volatile memory are stunning at the moment, and that is bound to
>affect the devlopment of DSLRs.
>
Here I really agree. 6-8 mp is pretty much enough for the vast majority
of actual uses and overkill for web images*. Beyond that, one is mostly
capturing and storing data beyond what is likely to make a difference in
use. There have however, been other usability changes of great value to
users like start-up speed, focus speed, low light focus, shutter lag,
frame rates, etc. etc. For example, even if it didn't add those couple
of mps, I would consider the 20D to be a far better camera for me than
the D60. It's smaller, lighter, faster and more capable in many ways.
Does that mean I won't have a 12 mp camera some day? Nah, I probably
will, but not for that reason alone. I was just looking at compact
cameras to possibly replace my old 2 mp S110. Although 2 mp is enough
for most things I would use it for*, I wouldn't mind an mp or 2 more.
But guess what? They only put the other improvements together with more
mps. You can't really buy a 3-4 mp camera with all the latest other
performance improvements. For another example, the Can*n S70 has several
improvements, including a better lens, over the S50, but you can only
get them packaged together with a 7mp sensor. The good news is that you
don't pay more for the newer camera than you would have for the old one.
Moose
* Are more mps really going to give a better web image than this, from a
2mp camera <http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Glads/pages/10-1053.htm>?
Or this one <http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Glads/pages/14-1075_.htm>?
But lower noise at higher isos and faster operation would make other
kinds of shots easier/possible.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|