You have got the numbers wrong. The answer to everything is 42 ;-)
Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gonz Sent: 31. august 2006 17:43 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: K10D - "facts" and "speculations" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Check the 'ordered m K10 today'. Rob is dropping heavy hints (about >>weather sealing, mainly), and someone called 'gerasimov' from Bulgaria >>posted a credible list of features containing a 22 bit A/D coverter. That >>could be Aaron's 67-ditching feature... >> > > Hmmm. This has been discussed to great length before, but unless they > have done something radical in other stages, the sensor itself doesn't > have a dynamic range anywhere near the one associated with a 22-bit A/D > converter, so why would they do that? > > - Toralf > There should be enough for at least 5 more bits for a total of 17. I.e. the original 12 plus each ISO setting. They could theoretically have 5 analog amps and 5 A/D convertors and a post conversion combiner for an effective total of 17. 22 however, would require another 5 bits on top of the 17, which is a whopping 32 times more detail. > -- 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
