On 23 Oct 2005 at 0:11, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Main reasons: > > 1) Better compactness+weight. > 2) I hate 4/3 format (any size), hence I'll often have to crop 18MP (4/3 > format) into 16.6MP (for getting 3/2 format). > 3) I already own a lot of K-mount lenses and no 645 glass. > 4) True wide angles available with FF and not available when cropping 645. > 5) Higher resolution lenses, compensating for slightly lower resolution > sensor (negligible after cropping 4/3 into 3/2 format). > > This might raise a big discussion, but I believe that: > > a) good 35mm lenses are better than MF lenses (anybody wanting the highest > possible resolution on digital mosaic capture is currently using APS or 35mm > glass, not MF) > > b) the system resolution more or less depends on the product of single > resolutions, not just by the lowest one. > Hence, if you have a lens capable to transmit say 80% of the subject detail > and > a sensor capable to capture 90% of the lens image, you get something like 72% > on > file, while most people think that you'll get 80% in that case. > > Explaining point b as I've done above is very rough, but I hope you'll get > what > I mean.
I'm with you Dario, the thing I don't understand is that everyone says it will be readily taken up because of the prevalence of 645 glass. What about all the great 35mm K mount glass around (much better and wider ranging than the P645 glass IMO), doesn't that then mean that a high end K mount body will sell too? Strange logic when you look at it that way. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
