Thanks. Interesting article.
Chuck Norcutt
On 3/13/2012 7:47 AM, Piers Hemy wrote:
> 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/
|