>
> Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:51:19 -0800
> From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [OM] Re: Slouching Toward Something Else
>
> Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> Not according to Moose's empirical tests.
>>
> That needs qualification. I tested the 6.3 mp 300D sensor against the
> 5.1 mp APS-C sized central portion of the 5D sensor. The 5D sensor
> clearly resolved more than the 300D. However, this was strictly a
> personal test to see if my assumption that I would not be giving away
> what I already had by cropping the 5D to match the 1.6x factor of the
> old 300D.
>
> I only made a big deal about it because it so strongly illustrated
> that
> mp count alone is not a reliable indicator of actual resolving power.
> Per pixel resolution of sensor systems has improved over time, at
> least
> for Canyon and, I suspect, for other brands as well.
> <SNIP>
> Moose
Your comment about mp count alone not being a reliable indicator is
right on;
it's really the ASIC and firmware that is doing the heavy lifting
that is providing
us with the image quality we are seeing. Mamiya learned this with
their 22 mp
ZD, which, while having a lot of pixels, suffered from a lack of the
firmare having the
capability to process the raw data in a way to maximize image
quality. Those of you thinking
of buying a Canyon some time in the reasonable future might want to
wait until
early next year...there should be some new models coming, and they
will have what the
new 400D has, DIGIC III....the importance of this cannot be
understated. I would
predict more accurate and vivid color, better resolution and less noise.
-Stephen.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|