View Single Post
billybobsky
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.
 
2006-11-09, 20:28

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moogs View Post
Maybe my definition of resolution and yours are different.

Do you consider the numbers

3872 x 2592 pixels

and

2896 x 1944 pixels

to be "image resolutions"?

The first is from a 10MP camera, the second a "half size" setting from the same camera. The SD14 images are 2,652 × 1,768. That is, when you open a document in Photoshop and go to "image size"... the above number is what you will see and what you will have to work with in terms of data. The above number is less than 5MP. You can spin it any way you want but it's a relatively low resolution IMO.

It may stand up to 50% Bicubic Smoother enlargements better than any other 4, 5 or 6 MP camera for example, but that doesn't make it "equivalent" to a good 8MP, because that 8MP is what it is. You don't have to stretch the image data to get there the way you would with an SD14. And don't get me wrong: I don't think it's "bad" at all; quite the contrary its colors are probably very compelling. And if all you need to do is make prints up to about 11x14. If you're regularly making prints larger than this, I wouldn't buy the SD-14, especially given the fact they're not really giving a price break despite the subpar specs.

And now back to your regularly scheduled BW photo expose.
I think the comparison shouldn't be resolution but rather quality. A 4.6 MP cmos photo will have a lower quality than a 4.6 MP foveon photo... I don't believe it will survive blowing up anymore than a cmos photo; and while it might be a little less fuzzy at full zoom, that fuzziness is caused by our brain and not by the sensor. However, they are offering 10.2 and 14.1 mp sensors... so the revolution will probably continue.

I also like the fact that the pixels are individually addressed, which might allow for higher contrast control with smart programming...
  quote