Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 24, 2003, 2:41 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 7
Default

Is there a way u can send me that file?
Magoober16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2003, 2:48 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

It is 3 plus mp in size but I can email it to you if you can receive a file that size.

Phil
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2003, 2:51 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 7
Default

took my awhle but i found it dling now

thanks for the help

im looking at the cannon g3 good choice?
Magoober16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2003, 2:57 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

The G3 has been rated better that the G5. G5 has been reported to create more noise. I believe that G3 would be a good camera. It has more manual control than your 460Z, a camera that I owned, you will have a learning curve to take advantage of that camera.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2003, 6:59 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

I must agree with Gibson; the G3 is a better camera then the G5. The G3 has nearly the same effective resolution as the G5, a 25% MP increase equals a 12.5% linear increae in actual resolution(you are dividig between two planes, remember). But, the G3 is mainly better, IMO, becuase the lens is better matched. The 5MP chip in the G5 seems to cuase pretty severe fringing problems, that were not severe on teh G3. Besides color and the sensor, the cameras are pretty much identical.

-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2003, 9:48 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WmAx
... a 25% MP increase equals a 12.5% linear increae in actual resolution(you are dividig between two planes, remember)....
Just to pick nits, it is an 11.803..% linear increase - the square root of the ratio. To double the linear resolution, the pixel count has to increase by a factor of four.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2003, 4:39 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

Quote:
Just to pick nits, it is an 11.803..% linear increase - the square root of the ratio
Thank you for correcting my 0.697 difference error. It is appreciated. However, I should warn, that I while do attempt to give accurate data, my level of precision is variable when subjected to scrutiny past the decimal point! I do usually state "approximately or approx.", I guess I slipped.

:-)

-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56 AM.