No one has programmed me. I didn't say it was 67% more resolution. I
said ten was 67% more than 6, which it is. In any case, ten megapixels
is substantially better, a noticeable improvement I would think. Good
enough for me. I don't want and can't afford a 7000 dollar pro camera.
Those who want that should go to Cannon..
On Sep 29, 2005, at 7:19 PM, graywolf wrote:
Boy have the ad writers programmed you, Paul. Since resolution is a
linear increase not a logarithmic one it is about 29% increase in
resolution, not 67%. You have to go to 24mp to double your resolution
from 6mp.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Uh, the rest of the world isn't using 12-17. Only a very few, and
they're spending upward of 5K to do so. Ten megapixels is 67% more
than six, and six has proved quite adequate for all my needs. I look
forward to ten and will be buying on day one.
Paul
On Sep 29, 2005, at 5:57 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Some sources have indicated that Pentax's upcoming ~10 megapixel
sensor
may be larger than APS-C (though still smaller than full-frame).
Whats the point of a 10MP sensor when the rest of the world is using
12-17
or larger? Perhaps an excercise in mediocrity.
Kevin
--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
