> Here, I have to disagree, to the extent that your statement is meant to
> say that the technology doesn't make much difference in how images are
> produced. I agree that 12 mp is overkill for the vast majority of uses -
> IF - you think only in terms of the past limitations of technology. 12
> mp of really clean, pixel sharp sensor, like the 5D, is better than a
> teleconverter, without any additional lens aberrations and without
> losing any speed or having to swap lens bits. 1/4 of 12 mp is 3 mp,
> just in your happy range. So for that 99% of shots you define, a 100/2.8
> lens is, in effect, a 100-200/2.8 lens, with zooming by cropping.
> Moose
I have thought of that as a real advantage as well. Even now with a 5MP
camera, I often shoot with the thought in mind that I will crop it to the
size I want, rather than trying to move closer. Of course you are somewhat
limited when you do that with 5mp.
And my son's Can*n digital DSLR has taught me the significant value of
higher ISO shooting.
Wayne
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|