Bingo! Well said, Rob ... Look guys, we all have different needs and expectations. What works in one scenario may not work in another.
I like to make big prints sometimes. From what I've seen, 6mp won't cut it at the sizes I'd like to see. But, for most of what I do, it's fine. Now, just so you don't think I'm bashing Pentax, allow me to reiterate: I like the D-series cameras. I like their size, I like the lens compatibility, I like the ergonomics, I don't mind the slower write speeds or buffer clearing .. but, I don't think that 6mp is adequate for some things I like to do photographically. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Rob Studdert > > What is the size requirement of the stock house to which you refer? You > > can convert to six megapixel image to a nice 72 meg, 8 bit file in the > > PSCS RAW converter. No stock house I've contacted wants images larger > > than that. The Hearst and Primedia photo editors I've worked with > > prefer them at about 36 megs for all but spread photos, which require > > only 50 megs or so. Yes, I want ten megapixels, but six are adequate > > for quite a lot of the work that even a mid-level working pro would > > attempt. > > Forget stock houses, you're shooting for stock and I appreciate that but I'm > not, they aren't even on my radar, I don't just want to be able to shoot to > print little magazine images. I want to be able to print large images and crop > like I can using my 67 kit and scanner. > > I find 6MP source images somewhat limiting and no matter by what means they are > upsized and expanded in volume they are still only 6MP when it comes down to > the reality, they will resolve no more than about 44.6lpmm from the best lens > over the little 24x16mm sensor. This translates to about 2.35lppmm on a 18x12" > print, not great resolution.
