Lance Couture Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Lance Couture wrote:
I love how everyone derides higher MP/sensor (50D and now G10), as if the technology never improves with these increments.
Maybe we should be trying to push old Pentium 150s to run at 5GHz, instead of shrinking the dies and adding multiple cores?
Give your heads a collective shake, people.
That's pretty funny comparing the G10 and 50D. Yes I'm sure the G10 has crammed more pixels in and noise is a bit better, but given how pathetic these cameras are above ISO 400 (200 for many cameras) it'll still be pathetic. Now if they had used their brain and combined digic IV and left the camera at 10MP they might have actually given Fuji a run for their money.
Also begs the question why you think someone serious enough to want 15MP in a P&S doesn't get a DSLR in the first place. If you actually want 15MP to make big prints, then you'll get far better results from a DSLR anyday. If you aren't making anything bigger than A4 what's the point of 15MP, 8MP would be plenty.
You misundertand the point I was trying to make. I wasnt comparing the G10 and 50D in terms of equivalent technologies.
With the current crop of releases, it seems we are witnessing the next "leap", if you will, in sensor technology.
Only a few pictures from the source have been posted (for the 50D), and no real vetting of the products. I completely understand the limitations of PnS sensors, but my point is the instant derision and criticism people heap upon the technology w/o and hands-on experience.
Who's to say yet that the G10's IQ will be less than the G9?
One is not going to get clean 1600 ISO out of a tiny PnS sensor, but if they can give lattitude to crop with higher res and equivalent or better noise at say... 400 ISO, then I think its an improvement.
Edited on Aug 28, 2008 at 02:41 AM
|