From DPReview's review of the Xpro-1
-----------------------------------------------------
Sensor • 23.6mm x 15.6mm (APS-C) X-Trans CMOS sensor
• 16.3 million *effective* pixels
• Primary colour filter (RGB color filter array)
----------------------
Image sizes 3:2
• 4896 x 3264
• 3456 x 2304
• 2496 x 1664
-----------------------------------------------------
Note maximum image size occurs at 3:2 aspect ratio and is 4896 x 3264.
Emphasis placed on *effective* is mine.
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/1/2013 6:35 AM, philippe.amard@xxxxxx wrote:
> I also notice that loss in LR with the x10 - the previews suddenly seem to
> "plop" as a cold slide would in the projector ...
> I attributed it so far to a sort of hidden lens adjustment.
> Yet Moose's explanation also makes much sense to me.
> What I don't understand is the 0.5 sec delay for the conversion to take place
> on screen
>
>
> Amitiés
> Philippe
>
>
>
>
>
> ========================================
>
> Message du : 01/05/2013 00:47
> De : "Moose " <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> A : "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Copie à :
> Sujet : [OM] LR vs. Aperture image sizes [was LR5 beta}
>
>
> On 4/29/2013 4:47 AM, SwissPace wrote:
>> I had a quick look at some of my Xpro-1 raw files ... quite a bit of border
>> is missing from the
>> LR files which I have just discovered from viewing the aperture version.
>
> Have you checked the image pixel sizes? I imagine you will find that LR
> delivers all the camera claims.
>
> If I recall correctly, camera specs and most converters ignore a few pixels
> along each edge. This is because they cannot
> be fully converted for accurate color, as some of the other, surrounding
> pixels needed for full decoding of the Bayer
> array are not there.That little set of border pixels are used in decoding
> color for those next further in, but not used
> directly as part of the image.
>
> Soooo, they need to include them in the Raw files, for use by converters, but
> they are not intended to be in converter
> output.
>
> DCRaw offers the option to produce these extra, edge pixels, so any GUI
> converter/editor using it underneath has that
> option, if desired. It's not really many pixels. On the A650, 3000x4000
> becomes 3024x4032. I used DCRaw some time ago. I
> couldn't see anything wrong with the color of the extra pixels, but I only
> look closely at a very few images.
>
> I can see why the camera makers would not include them in their specs and
> most converters don't include them in their
> output. All it takes is one yahoo blogging about false colors at the edge of
> the image to cause endless trouble.
>
> Assuming this is what you are seeing, I'm not sure why Apple would include it.
>
> Edgy Moose
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|