While Pentax may indeed be peddling something that may be of less value than appears in marketing, I really have to believe that any of the competitors would be doing the same in the situation. They are all trying to show a competitive edge. Whether that edge is as real as the hype is questionable. But I don't see Pentax being any different than the others in this realm.
Probably better to state that it is questionable how much benefit the purchaser of the K10D benefits from the 22 bit ADC. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, October 15, 2006, 4:01:58 AM, you wrote: DIS> On 15/10/06, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu DIS> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> When combined with this sensor. >> But what about other sensors? Like the 18MP Kodak one? I don't see any >> reason why the 645D won't use the already developed 22bit ADC (and the >> image processor as well). DIS> Obviously as sensor pixel areas rises there is an accompanying DIS> advantage in signal to noise ratio and subsequently sensor exposure DIS> latitude. So the better the sensor the more advantageous sampling with DIS> 22 bit precision becomes. If the system provides the advantages DIS> suggested then they'd be foolish not to implement it in future DIS> cameras. However the crux of the discussion here is of course DIS> regarding the validity of peddling the significance of a 22 bit ADC in DIS> a system that's really very unlikely to even use a fraction of its DIS> capabilities. DIS> -- DIS> Rob Studdert DIS> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA DIS> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 DIS> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours DIS> [EMAIL PROTECTED] DIS> http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ DIS> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
