Another reason to own a 5D. If a lens isn't good enough to meet the
5D's resolving power which has 12.8 MP in 864 square mm. it makes you
wonder what's actually happening (or failing to happen) with a 4/3's
camera which has 10 MP packed into 228 square mm, or the 30D which has 8
MP packed into 338 square mm.
I'm sure the new 4/3 lenses are designed to resolve to the limits of
these small sensors but our 35mm lenses are getting stretched even at
the pixel density of a 5D. Best not to ask too much of them.
Chuck Norcutt
Moose wrote:
> ScottGee1 wrote:
>
>>I wonder at what number we reach point of diminishing return with
>>sensor density?
>>
>
> I think we are already there. The question is when we reach the point of
> disappearing returns, when the sensors out-resolve all the lenses.
>
> And I think we are pretty close to that. I can clearly see the
> differences between really good macro lenses on a copy stand at their
> optimum apertures on the 5D, which means it out-resolves at least all
> but the sharpest of them.
>
> Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|