the manufactures will gurantee that we will be sold on more is better--it's the pricing curve. as newer semiconductor methods/equipment are deployed, chip density go up and power consumption down. you simply keep replacing the top sensor from yesterday with the new one today and shove the rest down the curve. we don't need it---they do to keep the money rolling in. I suspect the vast majority of the folks here could "live" quite well wtih 8 mega pixels SLR's--but why when you can get 22 and eventually 50?
i worked for one whopper cpu company, and they were champs at selling folks on why faster cpu's were "required". for some folks yep (like in very few) and for most folks nope. now storage is a different issue....
btw, love that hassy demo. kinda of wonder how annie L over at vanity can live with that inferior canon of her's--and how did she get by with only 16 mega for the last few years? i always thought those images in their mag looked digital.....
the hassy ad says you can be more creative with more mega pixels---uh, you mean crop more?
in the fine art landscape and nature print market, large prints are nearly 100%. it's irrelevant what other markets do. there are more self-identified serious landscape and nature photographers out there than any other kind, even if very few of them aspire to selling any of their work.
Herb....
Kerry Pierce wrote:
I'm talking about the pro market. Nothing of your clarification alters what I said above. The market for very large prints is a very small, niche market, compared to the market for prints 12x18 and smaller. There are far more wedding, event, sports and portrait photogs than anything else. For the size prints they sell, it's unlikely that many of them need or want a ~20mp camera.
Edited by HerbChong on Jun 02, 2008 at 10:53 AM GMT
i can shoot directly into the sun with no flare on many of my Pentax lenses including my really wide ones, not even radial flare lines, let alone aperture ghosts. i can't do that with most of my Nikons and the results i have seen from Canon at at best on par with Nikon but usually worse. that's not including veiling flare. there are exceptions, but not many.
Herb....
jamesf99 wrote:
OK, but that's hard to understand. I'm not sure what you're doing wrong and why you're unable to control flare, but I'm a WA guy when I'm not in the studio and if any lens will produce flare, it's a WA. Lens flare is unavoidable in some situations, regardless of which mfg made the lens. I'm not talking about diffraction problems...
