IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Fast pixels are good.
If there's enough light reaching the sensors, and the sensors are fast enough, then more pixels are better (assuming the lenses don't limit the resolution, of course). There's more flexibility.

Yeah, ~ 14 million good pixels are comparable to a good 35 mm film, but who was it that was singing the praises of a 41 MP Nokia?

;-)

Cheers,
Scott.
(More at DPReview. The comments point out lots of potential issues with this camera (e.g. dynamic range) but no cameras are perfect and it may be great for billboard-sized landscape prints. There's no way I'm getting one of these, even if I win the lottery - but maybe it'll help push down their other FF cameras a little faster.)
New Key phrase:
"big sensor" -- important, very very important

"I don't care about 41MP" -- I still don't, over a year later :)

The good bit about the 1020's sensor is that it's big, relatively speaking, and this is what gives it good low-light performance and dynamic range. A side effect of that is that it's high-resolution. I never use the 3x digital zoom that this gives.

I never use the 41MP images for anything, ever. Always downsampled to 5MP or so, assuming I don't just shoot in 5MP mode (which is a lot of the time).

The two things that I didn't mention then that I've come to enjoy now are the relatively wide aperture (f/2) and the OIS, which really comes into its own when shooting video - 1080p video that doesn't look like it came from a phone.

For A4 printing, ~8MP is fine. For A3, 16-18MP will see you right. Most people don't take pictures of sufficiently high quality with crisp focus throughout the scene for even these numbers to matter.

There are people who have a need for this (starting out in pro product photography springs to mind, as does architecture work for printing at the multi-metre scale), although it's a small niche. If you need massive megapixels, you're doing it for lots of money. Which probably means you've already gone past 50MP and are shooting with an 80MP Phase One medium format system. (if you need to ask, etc), with a lens ecosystem that's much better suited.



This camera, like the 36MP Nikon D800, will sell to people who like cameras, not photography.

Final thought - "maybe it'll push down their other FF cameras"

Hahaha, you're funny. You should do stand-up.

And damn it, Greg. You idiot.
New That's not a big sensor. This is a big sensor.
Polaroid 20x24 (3:54).

;-)

Hassleblad makes some outrageous things, too, of course. E.g. one of their 50 MP cameras can stack 6 shots to give a 200 MP image. Nikon microscopes have done similar magic for years - get higher resolution images than the sensor would normally permit.

But those are babies compared to things like 3.2 GP astronomical CCDs.

Camera technology marches on...

Cheers,
Scott.
(Yeah, I know that FF cameras aren't going to be cheap anytime soon. :-(
     Oooh. Canon wants me to win the lottery. And then buy this... - (Another Scott) - (7)
         Then another $20k on lenses and you're set -NT - (drook) - (1)
             Yup. :-/ -NT - (Another Scott)
         If you don't know why you need 50MP - (pwhysall) - (3)
             Fast pixels are good. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                 Key phrase: - (pwhysall) - (1)
                     That's not a big sensor. This is a big sensor. - (Another Scott)
         Only $100 more than the Mk III at release - (scoenye)

Fusion power might transform the Middle East from an important strategic asset for the Western world into a bunch of strangers killing themselves over disagreements about sand and magic.
117 ms