On 5/9/2016 3:01 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
Oly and Panny's latest, the Pen-F and GX8, are 20 MP, and the Pen-F HR mode
is proportionally larger. This amounts to nothing, about a 10% nominal
increase in linear resolution. Differences in sensor system, Bayer
interpretation and/or AA filter spec. can make as much or more visible
change than this with identical pixel counts. My guess is that this will be
the sensor for the E-M1 II. But even if they go to 24 MP (but see below), it
wouldn't amount to much, a 22-23% increase in nominal rez, visible at 100%,
but not much practical change.
For me, real-world practicality says that 18-24MP is the sweet spot.
16MP is definitely on the short end of it. Beyond 24 MP, it buys you
additional flexibility in cropping and processing.
But the other problem I mentioned, either moire, or throw away the rez with AA is a particular problem for Oly's HR
mode. 20 MP is likely the sweet spot there.
. . .
While I understand Chuck's hesitation for higher density sensors, I'm
perfectly fine with it as long as the gains are real and not a matter
of sales pitch.
While I hate referencing ancient cameras, the lessons learned are
still applicable and quite illustrative as they represent three very
distinct sensor designs and philosophies. I will make a comparison
between three high-quality, but ancient cameras in my possession.
Olympus E-1, 5MP
Olympus E-3, 10MP
Panasonic L1, 7.5MP
Yes, they can be illustrative. My first was an APS-C Canon 6 MP 300D. Next was the 13 MP, FF 5D. Its nominal MP count
over the APS sensor size of the 300D was lower, but it resolved more at 100%.
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?