Joel Wilcox wrote:
> On 10/16/07, Timpe, Jim <Jim.Timpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Death knell for many on this list? (10.1 mpxls.)
>>
>
> Not on my block. Makes my heart beat fast because I figure they went
> for quality.
>
I'm with you on that. Contrary to so many of the claims in spam, size
isn't all that matters.
I've posted here before about 5 mp on the APS-C size central portion of
the 5D image vs. 6 mp of the 300D sensor. The 5 mps out resolved 6 ad
did so with cleaner IQ. Exactly the same as 10 vs. 12.
The mathematical difference in resolution between 10 & 12 mp is tiny,
about 10%. 10 mp and going for high overall IQ seems better to me than
overshooting the current technical limits of the 4/3 sensor size. Other
factors will simply be more important to resolution and IQ.
Unless they improve resolution and IQ, all more mps do is slow down the
software that processes them and clog up storage faster.
The proof will be in the images it produces.
What it will mean in the marketplace, heaven knows. One likes to hope
that middle to high end DSLR buyers are a more discriminating lot than
the P&S buyers who have let the mp race lower the overall IQ of newer
cameras. That market is just nuts.
Looks to be pretty well priced in the US against the 40D and D300,
depending on which features are most important to any individual.
> Also histogram on the live view. If you haven't played with a C8080,
> I can't really describe how cool that is.
>
Got that on my hacked A710 IS, very useful.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|