Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I absolutely agree that lower noise, smoother pixels and more dynamic range beats lots of pixels for the most part. I think the way things are going before long we won't have to choose. Mike D On 10/28/10 4:01 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > Moore's law says computer stuff and we include digital cameras will get > twice as good every year and a half and cost half as much. > I don't think doubling the Mp's makes a camera twice as good. > I've just about said the opposite. If I did think I needed 21 instead of 12 > mps shooing a Canon 5d Mark II (same price as my D700 but with almost > twice > the Mp's) instead of Mark R shooting with a Nikon D700. > But some people want the S and some want the X. > Some people want the high rez and don't care about high ISO's (the X) and > other people want the opposite. The S. > > I'm pulling for the Leica M and S to be available with two Rez options like > the Nikons and Canons. A high rez version for big bucks but low ISO's. > And a lower rez version for street shooters who need to shoot fast indoors > and at night. > And I think there should be one in the middle. The "normal" body. > That's three cameras making for more horizontal shelf space. > > Which is why there are 5 kinds of bite sized shredded wheat. > I like the vanilla. > > > -------------------- > Mark William Rabiner > Photography > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > mark at rabinergroup.com > Cars: http://tinyurl.com/2f7ptxb > > > > >> From: Mike Durling<durling at cox.net> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group<lug at leica-users.org> >> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 09:15:04 -0400 >> To: Leica Users Group<lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] The T Stops here >> >> Very interesting analysis, Mark, and also a good article you linked to. >> Its clear that neither sensor type is a-priori better than the other. >> There are always trade offs. For Leica cost is less a factor so they >> concentrate on other areas. Canon and Nikon are in a much more >> competitive >> environment so they have to squeeze out the most bang for the buck. >> >> Pixel density is always a concern, but its a moving target. Moore's law >> says we double chip density every year and a half or two years. That's >> from a manufacturing point of view. To some degree it seems that the >> newer >> imaging chips can stand a higher pixel count with the same or better >> noise. >> The D40 and D40x were not too far away from each other generationally, so >> lower noise performance was the tradeoff for more pixels. In the same >> vein >> the Canon G11 got better noise performance than its older sibling the G10 >> which had more pixels. It will be interesting to see how the new D3100 >> and >> D7000 compare with their elder brethern when they come out. >> >> Mike Durling >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >