On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 06:21:19PM +0200, Boris Liberman wrote: > > Jaume, the "IQ is always better in larger sensor land" (which is direct > generalization of the quote above) is debatable. If you shoot targets in > controlled environment, then indeed it is likely to be true up to the up > todate-ness of the gear being compared. If you do real life shooting it > is not all that straightforward.
Oh, it's pretty straightforward. For everyday use (natural light daytime photography, etc.) and images intended for 8x10 prints or smaller, any of the sensor sizes being discussed (4/3, APS-C, 24x36) will perform well enough that the IQ limitations of the sensor aren't really an issue. (And progress marches on fast enough that this year's smaller sensor probably outperforms last year's larger model, anyway). We'll move on beyond that argument, just as we've mostly moved on from megapixel wars. We're just seeing another variation in the "convenience vs. quality" argument that has been going on almost as long as photography existed. It re-surfaces every time a new format comes alomg (35mm, APS, digital; I suspect medium format and half-frame cameras were denigrated when they first showed up, too). -- 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.
