FF should not only be able to achieve higher system resolution at same or larger sensor resolutions, it should also be able to achieve same low noise performance at higher ISO sensitivities than APS sensor due to larger area sensor pixels. Just like APS images better than tiny digital p&s sensors when done right, D-FF should image better than D-APS when done right.
-- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 3:44 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 Mark Roberts wrote: > Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc. > > There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame. > None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing, > consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more > choose not to go full-frame than they could have chosen not to go > digital. I fully agree. This FF marketing trend is the most important aspect of the whole matter, replacing for DSLR users the silly pixel race which took place among P&S's. The donkey is flying and I want to do that too ;-) Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
