I think that he was just pointing out that noise is a factor of sensor
size. Under ideal, bright conditions there should be little difference
in the images from each of the cameras at the base ISO which is
noiseless. The larger sensor camera will just provide relatively noise
free images under a much wider range of conditions and noise does
interfere with detail.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Jan 17, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> What is the point you are trying to make about sensor size? It must be
> very obvious, but I am missing it.
>
> Joel W.
>
> At 10:49 PM 1/17/2005 +0800, you wrote:
>
>> First, the E-300 has 4 times the sensor size than the C8080. Second,
>> at such
>> low ISO I don't think there is any influence on the resolution, if yes
>> Olympus would have made the E-300 go down to ISO50.
>>
>> C.H.Ling
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Joel Wilcox" <jowilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, I am actually sticking with the C-8080. My interpretation of
>>> the
>>> review is that the C-8080 bested the E300. The tests were a bit
>>> mismatched
>>> because the C-8080 was shot at ASA 50 and the E300 can go no slower
>>> than
>>> 100.
>>>
>>> Joel W.
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|