Hi Moose. Thank you (and all the others replying to my posting) for
the information.
I am still wondering why Olympus itself made the comparison between
410 and 400, coming up with the sentence
"The new 10-million pixel Live MOS sensor reproduces images with rich
gradations equivalent to an 8-million pixel CCD"
I cannot understand it in another way than that the images of a
10-million CCD must be "richer in gradations" than the 10-million NMOS
or 8-million CCD, according to Olympus' statement.
It is also hard to see why two cameras (being almost each others
lookalikes) should have different sensors. Why didn't Olympus build
the E-400 around the MOS sensor as well, only leaving out the live
view? The E-410 development must have been in progress when they
marketed the E-400, so it would have been cheaper to use MOS for both
cameras.
Frank.
Frank van Lindert
Utrecht NL.
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:37:59 -0800, you wrote:
>Sensor, schmensor, I don't think it means a thing until it's all
>together with the processing circuitry in a working camera and image
>output can been seen and evaluated. I wouldn't care if my 5D used a TRSH
>sensor, as long as it made he same quality images it does.
>
>Moose
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|