Brian Swale wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Popular Photography issue for April 2005 has just hit the shops here
Wow, it's like a time warp. I just received the June issue a few days
ago. They must send them by sea.
> there is an interesting review of 9 digital cameras and what they are
> capable
> of. Here they are, with the maximum acceptable print size they are
> reported
> to be capable of:
You seem to have misread the alphabetical order of the pages as a rank
order. If you look at page 91, you will see that they only ranked 1st
through 3rd place for each performance category. The ranks you have
shown are for Image Quality. If you read the article on p34, you sill
see that these ranks aren't based only on resolution. Correct table
would be:
> Canon EOS 20D 8.25 MP 12 x 17.5 inches Rank 1
> Canon EOS Digital rebel 6.3 MP 10 x 15 inches
> Fujifilm Finepix S3 Pro 12.3 MP 11 x 16 inches Rank 2
> Konica-Minolta Maxxum 7D 6.1 MP 10 x 15 inches
> Nikon D70 6.1 MP 10 x 15 inches Rank 3
> Olympus E-1 5 MP 10 x 13 inches
> Olympus Evolt E-300 8 MP 12 x 16 inches
> Pentax *ist DS 6.1 MP 10 x 15 inches
> Sigma SD10 3.4 MP 9 x 13 inches
>
> My OM bodies (especially the OM4Ti) and lenses are proven to be capable
> of better than A3 size - and 12 x 18 inches.
> The OM4T and Zuiko 35~105 can do better than that with Fuji Superia Reala.
Undoubtedly true, but not really comparable in that neither you, I or
anyone else on the list knows how your standards of acceptable image
quality compare to Pop Photo's. Whether tougher, easier, 'better' or
'worse' they are certain to be different.
> I have been thinking about this recently since I have been asked to take
> some large panorama shots. So I am also definitely relieved that the E-1s
> recently sold at a huge discount in Auckland were not priced higher !!
Camera/lens resolution is not the only criterion for panoramas. You can
easily get more detail by using more frames with a longer lens. I
suspect even a moderate fl change would have a greater effect on detail
in the panorama than the relatively modest differences in resolution
between most of the cameras in this test. So using an E-1 instead of a
20D, you might use 3 50mm frames instead of 2 35mm or 5-6 100mm frames
instead of 3 50mm frames and end up with more resolution in the final
panorama than with the 20D and fewer frames.
Although the particular example in the site I posted yesterday in answer
to another post is overkill for any reasonable need, it does clearly
show the effect of longer focal lengths on detail in panoramas
<http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel.htm>.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|