You are correct that a 4/3 sensor is a better fit to an 8x10... but only
if you also assume use of the full frame with no cropping. You are also
correct about the "loss" of the extra pixels in a 2:3 format sensor...
if you are specifically targeting prints of a certain aspect ratio and
carefully frame every shot.
But you are incorrect to say that "Chuck says the OM-D needs to have
more pixels". I have never said that nor would I... especially since
16MP is more than my 5D's 12.7MP. :-) Also, as I pointed out yesterday
from DPReview's testing of dynamic range the OM-D outdoes the 5D by
about a full stop. Not too shabby.
Nothing wrong with the OM-D's sensor that I can see. But I still want a
full frame sensor and it's only slightly related to pixel count and not
at all related to aspect ratio except insofar as the chosen body might
make best use of my existing lenses.
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/4/2012 11:13 AM, Bob Benson wrote:
> As you may remember, I've been lurking for, oh, fifteen years and have
> thoroughly enjoyed and benefitted from most every discussion.
>
>
>
> Now, I do have a question for you experts. Has to do with 4/3 and
> megapixels.
>
>
>
> Background - I do mostly 20 x 24 prints for gallery hanging and sales, and
> for the last 5 years or so have used Oly 4/3 with Zuiko's for most. E-5
> and EPL-3 these days. As you might imagine, highly satisfied.
>
>
>
> My question: I understood the original rationale for 4/3 was the "8 x 10"
> print form-factor. I have understood "full frame" to be useful for the 2/3
> print ratios, e.g., 20x30. My question - if one is targeting the 4/3 as
> the outcome print format, isn't the "effective" megapixel more than the
> same number of pixels in "full frame" because one loses the extra width?
> That is, if I use 20x24 compared to 20x30 prints, don't I lose the benefit
> of the "extra" 6x20 pixels, or about 1/4 (24/6) of them . meaning that 12
> MP 4/3 is the equivalent of 16 PM full-frame? So when Chuck says the OM-D
> needs to have more pixels . wouldn't a full-frame equivalent need to be 21MP
> or more to be "better" ?
>
>
>
> Or . is there something else going on here?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Bob Benson
>
>
>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|