I'd like to suggest that the proponents of their respective
viewpoints actually take and post real pictures (and crops) to prove
their points.
On Jun 22, 2007, at 4:11 PM, Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Austin
Franklin
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 7:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: EOS A slightly silly query
Hi Peter,
On the other hand, the pixels density of the 30D and potentially
the 10MP 40D is greater than the 5D. You have more pixels
covering the same area of an image taken side-by-side and framed
identically.
It depends on what you mean by "framed identically". A 10MP
sensor, no
matter what the physical size, that contains the same extents of
the image
will have the same number of "pixels" covering the same image
area. It's
just that the focal length of the lense will have to differ, or the
position
it's shot from will have to differ. But, if you mean standing in
the same
position using the same focal length between the two...then sure,
but the
image extents will be entirely different. It's not really IMO a
useful
"argument".
More pixels means more detail of smaller parts of
the image.
Which means the sensor cells are smaller...which typically gives less
dynamic range, and smaller cell size typically means more noise.
Typically,
larger sensor cells give better overall image quality.
Regards,
Austin
So isn't the key part of Peter's comment "side-by-side"?
Tom P
***********************************************************
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
