Ben Horne Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On
|
timbop wrote:
Ben Horne wrote:
gml1 wrote:
Am I the only one that's not happy with the 15mp on the 50D?
Probably.
D30 -> D60 = 3MP Difference
D60 -> 10D = 0MP Difference
10D -> 20D = 2MP Difference
20D -> 30D = 0MP Difference
30D -> 40D = 2MP Difference
40D -> 50D = 5MP Difference
Canon's MP increase is quite a bit more than previous models. What are you expecting? 20MP? 30MP? Do you really want to pay 7k for a 50D body with a 24MP sensor? Or perhaps around $1400 for a 15MP sensor? It sounds like your expectations are a bit unrealistic if you think that 15MP is not a big increase.
I fail to understand all the moaning about how these cameras are disappointing.
Ben,
I think the gripe is not too few pixels, but too many. I for one would prefer a 10 MP cam with better S/N ratio as opposed to better smearing techniques to hide the noise.
That might sound nice in theory, but if you add more pixels, it accomplishes the same thing. For example, the D3 is touted for how good it is in low light with the very high ISO settings. However, take a shot from the 1DsIII, and print it at the same size, and the 1DsIII will look as good if not better in some cases. However, print at low ISO, and the shots will REALLY shine on the 1DsIII. The high ISO stuff is nice, but don't forget that the low ISO performance is more important for most situations. The 50D at 10MP and ISO 100 will produce better results than the 40D at ISO 100. Let's say that the 50D has a little more noise than the 40D at the high ISO settings (which should not be the case --- they'll at least be equal, and the 50D will likely be better). By the time you downsample the 15MP to 10MP, the 50D shot will look even better.
Pixels DO make a difference.
|