Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I haven't heard these 24MP rumors but I guess that may be the next step.
> I recall Reichmann (of Luminous-Landscape) lamenting that the 16MP
> bodies were really stretching the capability of some of the lenses. I
> wonder can a lens designed originally for 35mm film resolve 24MP.
Geez, I really hate to sound obstreperous, folks, but...who NEEDS 24 MP?
No, seriously, I suppose it's a nice thing if you want to pay the freight,
but, somewhere around 12 MP would do about as good a job as any reasonable
person would want to do!
Seems to me there's a point beyond which it's primarily bragging rights, not a
discernible improvement in quality.
Not so?
keith whaley
> It's also quite recent memory that the 30D did not move up from the 8MP
> of the 20D. However, the same pixel density as on the 20/30D would yield
> a 21MP sensor on full frame.
>
> I think I just answered my own quesiton. The pixel density of the 30D
> equates to 78 lines/mm. Good lenses should be able to do it.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
> Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
>> I reached that point a bit sooner. If Oly is true to form and if
>> their announced mock up of the new single number E thingy makes it to
>> Photokina I fully expect that by the time a production model is
>> available the much rumored 24MP top of the line Canons and Nikons
>> will be out. In OM days, not keeping up did not really affect image
>> quality, just versatility. Different now.
>>
>>
>> Winsor
>> Long Beach, CA
>> USA
>>
>>
>> On Sep 15, 2006, at 12:28 PM, AG Schnozz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I know, the week is still young, but since the new entry-level
>>> pixel count is 10MP (and agencies are demanding it now), I'm
>>> getting pretty much to the point of throwing grandma (Olympus)
>>> under the bus.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|