Re: Nikon and Megapixels
- From: "Burgerman" <burgerman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 19:40:22 -0000
"David" <nospam@please> wrote in message news:49319950$1_3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Chris H" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:tspNNLaBOYMJFAIB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxIn message <wXeYk.24534$M25.2812@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Burgerman <burgerman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes"Bryon Lape" <noone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Xns9B656ABD2773BNoPoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"Burgerman" <burgerman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
"Bryon Lape" <noone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
So, has Nikon seeded the megapixels in the 35mm SLR realm to Canon?
Their top camera has about half what Canon does.
Very few lenses - even very expensve pr ones - can exeed the
resolution of a 12 million pixel sensor most of the time. Some can,
with care, at their best apertures, on a tripod under controlled
conditions. But double the pixels on even a full frame sensor would
stretch the capability of most lenses other than in lab controlled
As the lens is just passing light through itself, why would it have a
resolution problem? Would this not imply that film is only about 12
megapixel in resolution?
Compared a building sized print from the D700 at ISO 400 compared to a 400 film the D700 result was far in excess of the film in every way. Its a 12mp camera (I think) i'd say 8mp is just as good as film and visa versa shock horror. Which leads me to say... again why the f*ck would anyone need a 25mp camera for any applicable use?
You dont. 12m already out resolves most lenses in most conditions.
- Prev by Date: Re: Nikon and Megapixels
- Next by Date: Re: Nikon and Megapixels
- Previous by thread: Re: Nikon and Megapixels
- Next by thread: Re: Nikon and Megapixels