Well 'they' are not lying when they claim to have two more MP. That's not marketing hype. It is true. So far I have read nothing in the reviews of Canon's 8MP camera bodies that suggest they perform poorly when held up against Pentax's 6MP bodies.
Are you just editorializing? If Pentax had an 8MP and Canon only 6MP, would the same skew be applied? :-) Honestly asking, because so far I haven't heard a single person anywhere clamor for a camera with fewer MP. I agree there is a significant amount of hype in advertising. Two MP does not sound like alot. Yet, only 8 or nine years ago a 2MP digital camera was a BIG thing and totally blew away a 1MP or <1MP digital camera. Now those poor megapixels are essentially chaff? I realize in relative terms they are less, but they are far from meaningless. Tom C. "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered." >From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: Full Frame/Canon >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 09:00:56 -0700 > >It's an unfortunate thing that in marketing hype, bigger numbers >usually win regardless of whether a camera is a better performer or >not. Just like in the megahertz/gigahertz wars in the personal >computer world. > >Buyers should try not to be so driven by marketing hype. > >G > > > >On Aug 30, 2006, at 8:40 AM, Tom C wrote: > > > I agree with you. I would not upgrade from a 6 to 8MP body for the > > 2MP > > alone. If I was buying a first DSLR though, it would factor into my > > decision. > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
