You might like to read an article in last week's Amateur Photographer which
examined "whether the 20 and 30-million-pixel sensors of the latest Sony and
Nikon cameras offer any real benefits-or have they surpassed the abilities
of the lenses they rely on?" with this strap-line: "The idea that a sensor
outresolves a lens (or vice versa) is a simplification to the point of
error". The article itself provides a robust defence of the strap-line!
A 600kB pdf version is available here, (but not for long):
http://tinyurl.com/7ca6uvz
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: Dawid Loubser [mailto:dawid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 12 March 2012 17:25
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] FYI - Kirk did a nice preview of the OMD
On 09 Feb 2012, at 2:05 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
> But 16MP is more than enough. Right? Maybe, maybe not. For the vast
> bulk of my photography today, it will be more than sufficient. But in
> three years, it might not be. It's not that I'm a slave to the
> megapixel race, (far from it), but as often as I do this, I will want
> to jump as deep into the state-of-the-art as possible.
I have to chime in here. Yes, 16MP is unequivocally enough!! It was back
when the Canon 1DsMkII was first released years ago, it still is, and it
will always be - because there aren't even many lenses that can out-resolve
a 16MP sensor across the frame in most shooting conditions
--snip
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|