pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Megapixels going UP.......  (Read 11811 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 24, 2008, 18:31 »
0
With the announcements of 12mp and 14mp from Pentax, 14mp from Samsung, the new 12mp Canon etc etc it seems that 12mp will shortly be the starting point for DSLRs.

I have considered changing my D200 for a D300 or D2Xs, but at 12mp only, these cameras now look very expensive compared to the new competition.

No doubt Nikon and Sony will have their own announcements at PMA, and there are already rumours of a 14mp model from Nikon and possibly a high speed D3 to come before the Olympics.

So I'll stay with my D200 for a while and see what happens.


« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2008, 18:39 »
0
With the new 12+ megapixel dSLRs being crop sensor cameras, I feel that these entry level offerings are not going to be great for stock. Can you say 'chromatic abberation'?

The fact that the Canon 5D still has not been seriously challenged on IQ (at least at lower ISOs) speaks to the fact that the laws of physics have not yet been made moot.

« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2008, 19:17 »
0
I hope they don't just keep on cramming in more and more pixels.  The sigma foveon sensor produces good results with less MP's.  Larger sensors have more room for quality MP's.  I was disappointed with the canon 400d after using a 300d.  It didn't produce the quality I had expected with the extra MP's.  In the end, I bought a 5d, as the quality is far superior to the smaller sensors.

« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2008, 23:36 »
0
Yes, you're right there sharpshot.  At present the 5D appears to be the 'perfect' instrument for microstock in terms of quality and price.

I don't think it makes any sense to go beyond that, unless one wants to contribute to the RM agencies of course which is a different kettle of fish.

I certainly don't think Yuri's strategy of changing to Hasselblad makes any sense at all for microstock.

If Nikon launch a '5D equivalent' I'd buy it immediately, but the prospect of that looks like being a year or more away.

« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2008, 01:54 »
0
At present the 5D appears to be the 'perfect' instrument for microstock in terms of quality and price ...

If Nikon launch a '5D equivalent' I'd buy it immediately, but the prospect of that looks like being a year or more away.

Isn't the D3 Nikon's equivalent?

« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2008, 02:00 »
0
If Nikon launch a '5D equivalent' I'd buy it immediately, but the prospect of that looks like being a year or more away.

 :'( So true, it seems more than 1 year for sure. We can hope for Fuji S6 with F mount though.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2008, 02:03 by ale1969 »

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2008, 06:10 »
0
Isn't the D3 Nikon's equivalent?

5D is a mid priced full-frame. D3 is over twice as much.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2008, 08:38 by Nazdravie »

« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2008, 08:17 »
0
Isn't the D3 Nikon's equivalent?

5D is an mid priced full-frame. D3 is over twice as much.
agree and I'd call D300 is more equal to 5D rather than D3.my personal choice will be 5D though:)

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2008, 08:42 »
0
5D is definately an attractive option. But I'm carrying the Nikon flag so I'm pretty anxious to see what's coming out at PMA. If it's only a D40X replacement then I'm picking up a D300.

« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2008, 08:48 »
0
5D is definately an attractive option. But I'm carrying the Nikon flag so I'm pretty anxious to see what's coming out at PMA. If it's only a D40X replacement then I'm picking up a D300.

I was tempted to pick up the d300 but sincerely I don't find the 14 bits enough of a reason to spend 1300-1400 euro and get rid of my beloved d80 whose 10mb I can get as noiseless as they can possibly be for still life images with the appropriate postproduction tecniques.

I'd spend that money more productevely on a 85mm micro tilt lens and wait for a full frame for people who don't need to shot sports or news.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2008, 08:50 by ale1969 »

« Reply #10 on: January 25, 2008, 09:37 »
0
5D is definately an attractive option. But I'm carrying the Nikon flag so I'm pretty anxious to see what's coming out at PMA. If it's only a D40X replacement then I'm picking up a D300.

I believe it's the D80 that is due for replacement. It's not competitive against the 40D or K20D anymore. The new one will most likely have the D300 sensor and viewfinder, but in a plastic body like the D80.

« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2008, 09:50 »
0
This whole Megapixel craze has really outlived it's usefulness, in my opinion.  As stated above, the 5D proves that a bigger sensor with less pixels will far out-perform the APS-C sized sensors with more pixels crammed in, even if the bit depth is greater.  I was a hair away from buying a 5D, but chose the cheaper 40D, as I am just getting started in MS, but had I had another $800 to drop, the 5D would have been my choice, hands down.  I also have a few EF-S lenses that I didn't want to lose use of with the full frame of the 5d, even though I still have my 350D (which feels like a toy compared to the 40D). 

Bottom line is that I think that, just like SLR users measure focal lengths according to a 35mm standard rather than the 2x, 3x, 4x of a P&S, there should be a different measuring stick for sensors than the "effective pixels".  Any suggestions on what that measuring stick terminology might be?  I like the the "LPH" system that DPreview uses to show the the resolution up to 4000 LPH.  That is a great measuring tool.

« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2008, 22:18 »
0
5D is definately an attractive option. But I'm carrying the Nikon flag so I'm pretty anxious to see what's coming out at PMA. If it's only a D40X replacement then I'm picking up a D300.

I believe it's the D80 that is due for replacement. It's not competitive against the 40D or K20D anymore. The new one will most likely have the D300 sensor and viewfinder, but in a plastic body like the D80.

The rumors does speak pretty strongly for a D40X replacement as Nazdravie says. And just as the argument against a 'FX D300' - it would effectively be a D3 - so I think the model you mention would be too close to a D300, eating into sales while its selling like mad at the moment. Nikon should know better than compete against itself - but, we'll see in a weeks time  :)

« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2008, 23:45 »
0
The rumors does speak pretty strongly for a D40X replacement as Nazdravie says. And just as the argument against a 'FX D300' - it would effectively be a D3 - so I think the model you mention would be too close to a D300, eating into sales while its selling like mad at the moment. Nikon should know better than compete against itself - but, we'll see in a weeks time  :)

Nikon obviously knows very well that they shouldn't compete against themselves, so a cheaper FX camera would probably be much cheaper, even cheaper than the D300, and with a limited feature-set. Probably something in the direction of an FX D40 or D80, but for almost D300 price. That would be an ideal camera for studio use, stock photography, weddings etc., and would sell in huge volumes, probably more than the relatively successful 5D.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #14 on: January 28, 2008, 00:31 »
0
My guess is that Nikon will keep the D40 as the starter DSLR and combine features of the D80 and D300 to make a new model that will compete with the new EOS 450D.

Maybe a D90 with...

- D80-size body
- 12MP CMOS from the D300
- 3" LCD w/Liveview
- Mostly everything else carried over

« Reply #15 on: January 28, 2008, 02:23 »
0
I'm always surprised to see this MP war in DSLR area. I understand why they do it in PSs. People buy those without knowing much. And the more MP you have on the flashy sticky thing on your camera, the more  buyers you will get.

Much more educated buyers go for DSLRs, so I don't think anyone is really looking for more pixels they would have to pay for with IQ.

« Reply #16 on: January 28, 2008, 13:54 »
0
My guess is that Nikon will keep the D40 as the starter DSLR and combine features of the D80 and D300 to make a new model that will compete with the new EOS 450D.

Maybe a D90 with...

- D80-size body
- 12MP CMOS from the D300
- 3" LCD w/Liveview
- Mostly everything else carried over



I agree that thats certainly coming but not now. The D80 came out about a year after the D200 and I suppose the same timeframe is logical for the D300 and D90. It does seem to be the smart business decision but who knows. I myself am getting the D300.

Theres also the question of Nikons production capability: the factories at Sendai and in Thailand is supposedly maxed out at the moment (I believe its something like 12.000 D3's and 60.000 D300's per month, respectively).

By the way, thats also why we're probably not going see another FX soon: the demand for the D3 is far from being met and theres really nowhere for a new FX to be produced. Besides, FX sensors are expensive to make.

EDIT: I just found Thom Hogans predictions for 2008, I'll quote them here for what theyre worth:

Quote
D3x: announced as early as spring, certainly before the 2008 Olympics (August).
D3 body, new Sony FX sensor
Certainly over 20mp if the Sony sensor is used (there were other sensors tested at a lower megapixel level, most notably 18mp, but I'm guessing that we won't see them).
Probably max 5fps.
D80x: announced early 2008, ship shortly after. Could be named D90.
The 12-bit Sony version (IMX021) of the 12mp sensor used in the D300
15-segment AF
D40/D40x replacements: announced mid-2008, ship immediately
This is the tough one to predict, but I'm guessing 10mp, Live View
Change in AF system, but to what?
As of late December 2007, the D40x production has stopped (i.e. final D40x models made), making this prediction even more likely
What, no smaller FX body?
Not in 2008; 2009 at the earliest. First off, Nikon won't be able to make D3/D3x sensors fast enough, so adding another FX sensor to the mix is likely not in the cards for 2008.
Question for next year: 12mp or 18mp? Given the D3's success, I'm now saying 12mp. I'd be happy with that.


http://www.bythom.com/2008predictions.htm
« Last Edit: January 28, 2008, 14:00 by Secretariat »


modellocate

  • Photographer
« Reply #17 on: January 28, 2008, 18:41 »
0
Just my 2 cents: I shoot 12+ MP, but most of my sales are smaller sizes(whether that says something about my work or about 12MP I don't know). I dream of shooting 20 or 30 MP, but I wonder if it would really increase sales that much...

« Reply #18 on: January 28, 2008, 19:31 »
0
Well it looks like a Nikon D60, 10.2mp with knobs and whistles is coming....

I'd like a D3 junior, but I think that won't be launched until next year.

vonkara

« Reply #19 on: January 28, 2008, 19:40 »
0
I want a Nikon FX 16 mpx... I don't talk about the D3x here. The D3x will have more than 20. It's time that Nikon move for the professional in my opinion.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #20 on: January 28, 2008, 20:31 »
0
Well it looks like a Nikon D60, 10.2mp with knobs and whistles is coming....

I'd like a D3 junior, but I think that won't be launched until next year.

Well, I hope they have something else coming out because that would be a pretty big gap between a D60 and D300.

Wierd... Canon seems to have made the 40D and 450D too close in specs and Nikon may be leaving a big gaping hole.

I still think a D90 would be a good idea.

« Reply #21 on: January 28, 2008, 23:24 »
0
Yep - they appear to be launching twenty new compact cameras...

... but more importantly THREE new tilt/shift lenses.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #22 on: January 29, 2008, 00:04 »
0
I must be missing something here. Nikon seems to have played this whole camera release game masterfully with the D300 and D3.

I just saw the official D60 press release. Uhhhhh, it's a freakin D40x with a couple of new features, one of which is the new D60 badge.

I really hope they have something else up their sleeve than this.

« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2008, 00:52 »
0
Yep - they appear to be launching twenty new compact cameras...

... but more importantly THREE new tilt/shift lenses.

I'd take one of those tilt/shift lenses over a new camera any day. Perfect for product as well as architectural photography. The only problem is: They are not cheap, and I've forgotten where I've hidden that large pile of money   :D

« Reply #24 on: January 29, 2008, 01:18 »
0
Yep - they appear to be launching twenty new compact cameras...

... but more importantly THREE new tilt/shift lenses.

I'd take one of those tilt/shift lenses over a new camera any day. Perfect for product as well as architectural photography. The only problem is: They are not cheap, and I've forgotten where I've hidden that large pile of money   :D

Same here. I think we can just hope the old 85mm tilt micro will sell for a lower price than actual (about 1200-1300 euro). That would still be the perfect lens for shooting products especially food (for nikonians I mean, Canon have a wider range of tilt lens).
« Last Edit: January 29, 2008, 01:22 by ale1969 »

« Reply #25 on: January 29, 2008, 04:29 »
0
Well I'm drooling over the new Nikkon 24mm F3.5 Tilt/shift.


« Reply #26 on: January 29, 2008, 06:01 »
0
Well I'm drooling over the new Nikkon 24mm F3.5 Tilt/shift.




For architecture it would be exceptional, for products and still life I doubt so. Anyway the price tag (1800 euro) erases every doubt I could have about buying it :P

Edit:

These ones (especially the 100mm) are other obscure objects of desire:

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/5069/hands-on-zeiss-zf-macros-for-nikon.html
« Last Edit: January 29, 2008, 06:09 by ale1969 »


vonkara

« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2008, 10:36 »
0
Sony now announce what seem to be the sensor who will equip the D3x

It's a 24x36 Cmos sensor of 24.81mpx whit continuous shooting ability of 6.3 pictures/second if I understand. (There the Dpreview link)


http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08013001sony35mmcmossensor.asp

But I still want a 16mpx FX from Nikon :(

« Reply #28 on: January 30, 2008, 10:51 »
0
But I still want a 16mpx FX from Nikon :(

You just bought a spanking new D300, stop yourself before I grow too much envious  ;D

vonkara

« Reply #29 on: January 30, 2008, 11:44 »
0
But I still want a 16mpx FX from Nikon :(

You just bought a spanking new D300, stop yourself before I grow too much envious  ;D
Unfortunately the D300 is not that much what i was waiting for. Now I can see the limits of a DX sensor.

While the D3 is good for stock at around 800 iso and sometimes even at 1600iso, I have to keep the D300 at a maximum of 400 iso and Shutterstock will probably not approve them above 200iso. Keeping in mind that I never use anti noise software.

But it still a very good camera whit very interesting features. The only thing I was expecting to be better is the low iso noise, because the high iso is a great improvement in my opinion, but still not usable in stock

« Reply #30 on: January 30, 2008, 11:52 »
0
Well. it depends a lot on what you shoot.

Even the Hassy back is noisy in some situations. Surely the bigger the sensor the less noise you got but there are other tecniques to get low noise, especially if you shoot static scenes.

I'll also chamge my D80 just when an affordbale Nikon full frame will come out, not so much for noiselss high ISO, but more for finally using the wide lenses at full power.

« Reply #31 on: January 30, 2008, 16:17 »
0
I will probably upgrade to the D300.  I am not expecting any improvement in low ISO noise, but as I get very good results from my D200, so long as the D300 is as good as that I can then supply XL images to iStock.

For microstock the D3 has the wrong image size/price point.

All my Nikkor lenses are full frame so I shall be able to utilise a Nikon 5D equivalent when it is launched, but unless that camera is 16mp I'll stay with a D300.

It seems that a new FX will be launched before the olympics, but that will probably not be a medium price point camera; for that we'll have to wait at least another year.

vonkara

« Reply #32 on: January 30, 2008, 16:37 »
0
It's a smart choice to only have full frame lenses. My next lenses would surely be in that way also. But I heard it cost 50$ for Nikon to produce the DX sensors and 500$ for the FX.

Maybe it will be less in a short time whit more FX bodies launched. It seem my dream to have a 3000$ FX of 16mpx is far to come true.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2008, 16:40 by Vonkara »

« Reply #33 on: January 30, 2008, 20:12 »
0
The plot thickens with Sony's announcement of a 14mp DSLR today....

... and according to dpreview the body will retail for US $800 (surely that must be a misprint?).
« Last Edit: January 30, 2008, 20:14 by hatman12 »

« Reply #34 on: January 31, 2008, 00:44 »
0
It's a smart choice to only have full frame lenses. My next lenses would surely be in that way also. But I heard it cost 50$ for Nikon to produce the DX sensors and 500$ for the FX.

Maybe it will be less in a short time whit more FX bodies launched. It seem my dream to have a 3000$ FX of 16mpx is far to come true.

The higher price for the FX sensor is a result of a combination of volume and yield, and the latter is by far the most important. While that may improve in the  future, I wouldn't bet on it. At the same time, the crop-sensors get better and better, so there's really very little to worry about.

The wide-angle lens argument is hard to understand. Some of the best WA zooms on the market are the Zuiko 7-14/4 and 11-22/2.8-3.5, both for the 4/3 format that is even smaller than DX. One of the most important reasons for the quality of those lenses, is the principle stated in the 4/3 concept that light should hit the sensor at a 90 degree angle to avoid light falloff and softness at the corners. The result is some very sharp lenses.

With a small sensor, this is relatively easy to achieve. With an FX sensor, the lenses would have to be rather large to follow that same principle, and I doubt that Nikon's lens mount is large enough to accommodate such a lens. Still, Nikon has managed to achieve astounding results with the new 14-24/2.8.

I use Nikon as well as Olympus btw., but my next upgrade will probably be to an E-3 before I consider the D300. The Olympus cameras and lenses are simply easier to live with, and the quality is really first rate   :)

« Reply #35 on: January 31, 2008, 14:57 »
0
Sony announces 24mp flagship DSLR, full frame, available this Autumn.....

« Reply #36 on: January 31, 2008, 22:07 »
0
The plot thickens with Sony's announcement of a 14mp DSLR today....

... and according to dpreview the body will retail for US $800 (surely that must be a misprint?).

It's not a misprint, and it's not much of a technical achievement. They make tiny p&s sensors with 14MP nowadays. The target group for the A350 is typically first-timers who will never print bigger than 6x8, if they print their photos at all. Although the image quality is probably more than good enough for most purposes, they can probably get away with a bit more high-ISO noise than with the pro-bodies.


PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #37 on: January 31, 2008, 22:35 »
0
Sony announces 24mp flagship DSLR, full frame, available this Autumn.....

Yikes... The sleeping giant is awake. This looks like they're out for the kill and that this won't be a community sensor. So no 24MP D3X. A 24MP full frame is pretty compelling. And given their aggressive pricing this could really hit Canon and Nikon hard.

« Reply #38 on: February 01, 2008, 03:43 »
0
The rumour now is that there will be three 24MP FF cameras from Sony within the next 12 months, and that one of them will be a 5D competitor. I'm not surprised to see this at all. Sony regard camera bodies as short-lived consumables that can be priced low, while their lenses last "forever" and are rather expensive.

Except for stock photography, megapixels as such have lost their value. In a way, it's a good thing and very democratic. What camera people can afford will no longer be important for the quality of the photos. The abilities of the photographer still will.

« Reply #39 on: February 01, 2008, 05:31 »
0
Except for stock photography, megapixels as such have lost their value. In a way, it's a good thing and very democratic. What camera people can afford will no longer be important for the quality of the photos. The abilities of the photographer still will.

I agree with Epixx. At what point is it that megapixels stops mattering? This strikes me much like the Intel/AMD wars a few years back with both trying to produce the fastest processor. When they hit 3 GHz, it stopped mattering because the processors were faster than most people needed. I think that is about where digital cameras are now. Let's face it, a 10 MP camera can put out a pretty striking 10X13 photo which is about as large as the average person's printer can put out.

Where I see this heading in the next two or three years is less toward the Megapixel side and more toward the quality/speed issues. I see companies like Nikon and Canon developing even better sensors with less noise and faster image processing and storage. I think you'll see this on both the professional end and the consumer end of cameras, but especially at the consumer end once the average Joe realizes that he doesn't really need a 16 MP camera, but a high quality 12 MP sensor to do the same job. Consumers are much smarter than about their purchases than they were  even 10 years ago, but digital photography is new to many of them and they are not "in the know" - yet.

That does not mean that there will not be a market for higher Megapixel cameras, merely that the people who need or want them will be more specialized. Just like a gamer or a digital designer often needs a faster processor and memory, an avid amateur photographer will seek out higher end P&S cameras or low to medium end dSLRs.

On the professional end of the spectrum, I believe you will see the MP craze slow when 20-30 MP cameras become the norm. What will become ultimately important is the sensor quality. In the next several years, I would not even be surprised to see "specialty" sensors with embedded firmware that excel at one thing - perhaps super-fast sensors for capturing action such as sports, sensors designed for indoor/lowlight situations, sensors for outside/landscape shots, etc. Ideally, these sensors would be easily swappable (essentially plug-and-play), but specialty cameras would probably be the norm - at least at the low end of the dSLRs. Think of it this way: Right now you buy the best general camera you can and then buy a lens for the type of photography you intend to do and come out with some great shots. But imagine if you bought a lens and sensor combination that were intended to work together exclusively. For that matter, the sensor might be built into the lens itself rather than the camera body. Of course, this scenario is quite a ways out into the future, but as people continue to specialize more and more, I can't help but seeing it become magnified in the photography industry in the coming years. You are already seeing it, and have been for some time now, with companies like Fuji making cameras designed primarily for "forensic photography". This will make it easier for people with little or no training to take extraordinary images. The upside is that the images will all be "perfect" (take that with a grain of salt). The downside is that all the photos will look the same.

That's the "business" end of things. At the other end of the spectrum, you will still see the "artists" who require more flexibility than these specialty sensors/lenses provide. I believe the big name companies will always cater to these folks as these are the ones that give a company its reputation. Sure there will be companies that say "our camera is the best macro or telephoto or panoramic camera on the market", but companies like Canon and Nikon will be able to point to the best photographic art and say "Hey, that was taken with our camera" which will always translate into sales for those who are committed to the art-side of the industry.

Remember, these are really super-simplified scenarios, but from what I've seen, this is the direction almost every industry is taking. The reality is surely going to include something entirely unexpected. That is what makes the future so captivating.

« Reply #40 on: February 01, 2008, 06:15 »
0
Good analysys, all in all we have to think that sensors are nothing more than "modern" film. Like there were so much different film types, with different profiles, grain, sensibility, finesse etc so in future there should be different sensors so postprocessing times (that are making up the costs saved by digital shooting) can be reduced.
And yes, interchangeable sensors is the way to go.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2008, 09:43 by ale1969 »

« Reply #41 on: February 01, 2008, 09:34 »
0
I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned, but last year Kodak announced a replacement for the bayer filters (developed by Kodak) used on virtually every imaging sensor from camera phones to high end DSLR's and beyond (the Sigma sensor being one big exception).  The new filter pattern dramatically reduces noise by using light more efficiently (clear is used for luminosity data, not green, there is less interpolation of the color channels used to recreate the image), side by side comparisons with basically the same sensor but different filters (the examples that I have seen have been PnS sensors) showed 800 ISO pictures with the new filter having equal to or less noise than 200 ISO shots with the old filter.  The results are so stunning that it leads me to believe that the new filter pattern will be the biggest single step forward in sensor design, possibly in decades, while replacing one of the cheapest parts (firmware will need adjustment, but adaptation of the technology is relatively easy).  Since the old filter is universal it leads me to believe that the new filter will be adopted by all the major players relatively quickly (if not they will be left in the dust), the first models are expected out later this year.  I expect to see the noise in all imaging sensors, no matter what the size, to be dramatically slashed within two years.  Kodak is going to make a fortune licensing the technology (same as the bayer filter).  Unless my current body gives out, I'm going to hold off on a new one until the new filter is out, the cost difference will be minor compared to old bodies, yet the improvement will be dramatic, any body bought this year will be obsolete in the noise department within a year or two.

Camera manufacturers already acknowledge (privately to themselves or other industry insiders, the public is still blissfully unaware for the most part) that they have passed the useful MP point on a decent % of cameras, the sensor resolution being beyond lens resolution for all but the highest quality glass, PnS cameras passed that point a while ago, even the best PnS glass can't resolve 8mp, and the highest resolution consumer DSLRs are beyond what cheap lenses can resolve, the push for MPs is degrading IQ for the most part because of the signal to noise ratio getting worse with more MPs, creating noise and shrinking dynamic range, but they sell more if there is a bigger # on the sticker, until the public stops buying based on the MP rating alone, camera manufacturers are stuck, unlike computer chips where solid benchmarking can prove the speed of a computer, image quality is much more subjective, changing the attitudes of the public will be difficult, 95% of the public have no idea how to interpret IQ tests performed on cameras, and imaging test shots for the most part are woefully pitiful, only taking shots that trained eyes can understand instead of side by sides of pretty things that the pubic can understand.

« Reply #42 on: February 07, 2008, 10:27 »
0
I found this about the new kodak sensors.  Looks interesting.

http://www.photonewstoday.com/?p=10859

« Reply #43 on: February 07, 2008, 11:07 »
0
Here is one that specifically talks about the new filter and not the sensor that Kodak is pairing with it for themselves.  With the Bayer filter being industry standard, it isn't too hard to imagine that this will be the industry standard shortly.

http://www.apertureprofessional.com/showthread.php?t=4172

rinderart

« Reply #44 on: February 12, 2008, 01:34 »
0
I don't want more I want better.

« Reply #45 on: February 12, 2008, 07:10 »
0
I don't want more I want better.

This seems to be the overall feeling of all users except for the consumer P&S range.

We're on the limit of some lense capabilities so the Kodak path is really interesting, the 24mb Sony sensor doesn't sincerely wet my pants.

« Reply #46 on: February 12, 2008, 09:02 »
0
For me it's a business purchase. Since IS pays by size, to maximize my sales potential and for top image quality I would need a 16mp full frame.... but I'm a Nikon man so I'll have to wait.  I don't want more MPs for many reasons including new computer upgrades to handle bigger file sizes, more storage costs....


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4805 Views
Last post May 23, 2006, 16:46
by madelaide
1 Replies
3042 Views
Last post August 19, 2010, 06:59
by dirkr
13 Replies
3902 Views
Last post April 24, 2017, 16:15
by pancaketom
169 Replies
13960 Views
Last post August 26, 2019, 17:22
by Amanda_K

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results