G McGrath said <The only attraction pure pixel count has for me is in
being able to crop more radically>
Is this not potentially more useful than you make it sound. If one
tries to photograph birds without building hides and devoting hours
to the project the ability to crop radically must surely, at the very
least, enable you to use a significantly shorter focal length lens.
A relative was visited by a white guinea fowl and used her Olympus
mju1200 to take a grab shot of it on the fence of her back garden.
When cropped drastically to isolate the bird, this still showed the
feathers of the crest and that it was not an albino.
This does not contradict any of the arguments relating to variation
of pixel sensitivity etc with pixel size, but as the guinea fowl is
not a small bird, suggests the less expert among us could use all the
pixels available for smaller targets if the price in money and lost
performance were not unacceptable. Or am I missing something?
Perhaps I should say that I am still using film with an OM2SP and
Zuiko lenses from 24 to 500 mm but anticipate being forced to go
digital before long, if only because of the increasing difficulty in
getting film processed and prints supplied in an acceptable manner
- I have had to change my preferred local outlet twice in the last
year as the processors reduced the contents of their 'package'.
Brian Gray
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|