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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 22, 2004, 7:39 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
Mikefellh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,707
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
So, we are both assuming that they are Smartmedia.* He could have found an Xd Picturecard to Smartmedia Adapter that fits in his UZI.** After all, his reply was to a post discussing the availability of such an adapter.

If something like this does work, a*LOT of Oly owners would want to know about it!
I already knew about the xD to Smartmedia adapter (since all I write about is Oly cameras)...problem is it's too big for the Oly cameras BECAUSE there's a doorswitch, and because you can't close the memory door to activate the doorswitch, the camera won't operate.

Anyway, this is a moot point since the poster corrected themselves...in the C-2100 manual it says the limit is 64megs, but that's only because that was the largest size available at the time, the C-2100 CAN use 128meg memory.
Mikefellh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 22, 2004, 7:44 PM   #32
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

slipe

Since you mentioned Dave's resolution tests,also look at what Dave said about the noise in the model you selected for comparison:

"Image Noise: Reasonable noise at low ISO, objectionable at high ISO - Watch out for Auto ISO mode under dim lighting! Higher image noise is an unavoidable consequence of the ongoing practice of cramming ever-more pixels onto the same size sensor chips, so it's no surprise that the C-60's 6-megapixel sensor has a hard time at high ISO settings"

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/C60/C60A12.HTM

So, do you really believe the models using a 7.2 Megapixel 1/1.8" Sensor aren't going to be even worse?

The amount of Chromatic Aberrations/Purple Fringing we'll have will also be interesting to see from the new models just announced.

We're producing a new generation of cameras that will be useable only in the best lighting conditons. So, if lighting is not as good, consumers will be forced to buy a much larger, more expensive camera (or live with poor quality images).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 22, 2004, 9:15 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default


Quote:
So, do you really believe the models using a 7.2 Megapixel 1/1.8" Sensor aren't going to be even worse?
If you think the C60 crops I posted look worse than the 3040Z crops then I guess the 7Mp images will be even worse.

I have a wide format printer. Little 8 X 10 get lost on the wall, but 13 X 19s look good to me. 5Mp is marginal for a 13 X 19 even if I don't have to crop. I seldom take a picture that I don't find can be cropped a little. And with a rangefinder type viewfinder I almost always have to crop because of the 85% or so view it gives. I hate shooting with the LCD.

One technology that will help is stabilization. I'm hoping Minolta can adapt their sensor stabilizer to smaller cameras if the Konica engineers don't screw things up with their ridiculous shutter lags and cycle times. Minolta claims 3 f stops for their stabilization, which might be a little overstated. But it is over 2, and that takes you back to shooting in most lighting conditions with a decent ISO.

I want the pixels. I have no use for a 3Mp camera. It isn't much hassle to apply Neat Image to anything I want to post or print, and Photoshop now has a filter that is reported to be pretty good for CA and purple fringing if it becomes a problem. I'm still using PS7 so I can't vouch for the filter, but Neat Image works fine.


I'm looking forward to tests on the rumored Pentax 770. If it works I might consider one. 5X zoom and 7Mp in a camera I can carry around is appealing. Then again, it might be too awful to consider. I sure wish someone could fit stabilization in a camera like that.
slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 22, 2004, 10:04 PM   #34
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

slipe wrote:
Quote:
If you think the C60 crops I posted look worse than the 3040Z crops then I guess the 7Mp images will be even worse.

Slipe, even you admitted that the 3MP images looked just as sharp viewed at 100% size on screen, and had less noise. You magnified the "you know what" out the crops for comparison purposes, to the point of pixelation. Sure, the higher resolution camera will show more detail in this type of crop.

They'd probably show more detail without magnifying it so much.Look at how large of a size you're viewing it at. Heck, I have to scroll around on my tiny 19" monitor to see the whole image, without magnifying it.

When you print this same photo the crops came from, at a reasonable size (and most users will never print at more than 8x10"), then it will look fine, and you know it:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_...s/P3080020.JPG

Also, these sample images are taken in optimum lighting conditions. Try comparing images with less light, at higher ISO speeds.

Quote:
I'm looking forward to tests on the rumored Pentax 770. If it works I might consider one. 5X zoom and 7Mp in a camera I can carry around is appealing. Then again, it might be too awful to consider. I sure wish someone could fit stabilization in a camera like that.
Well, some of the newer Panasonic models have image stabilization in a pocketable model. For example, the DMC-FX5. Unfortunately, Image Stabilization doesn't help to prevent blur from subject movement, and ISO speed in this model is limited to a maximum of ISO 200 (a limit that I think will become very popular in many newer cameras, and even then, I think you'll see users wanting to stick to ISO 50 to prevent objectionable noise).

Just so we're clear, I would like to have higher resolution in a smallcamera, too. As you know, I carry a 5MP Konica KD-510z in my pocket (although, if Konica would have offered a model using the 4MP 1/1.8" CCD with the same features, I would have bought it instead).

Unlike most consumers, I'd like to be able to print at larger sizes. However, the trend is for more an more pixels, in smaller and smaller sensors, and I believe it's just for marketing purposes. I do not believe you'll get any real increase in quality now, with a higher resolution sensor in such tiny CCD's (like the new Sony 1/1.8" 7.2 Megapixel model just announced). We were already "on the edge" of accceptable quality with the existing CCD's.

The negative effects these newer sensors will have on dynamic range, noise, and chromatic aberrations, simply won't be worth it; and consumers will no longer be able to buy a camera capable of shooting in many lighting conditions, without spending a lot more money on a much larger and more expensive camera (which may be what the manufacturers really want).

IMO, the Dynamic Range of the newer generation of sensors is already pretty darn bad (not even taking the newly announced models into consideration). Resolution charts never tell the whole story. You've been at this for a while, too. You know the deal.

Heck, I went to a wedding on Sunday. Guess what I shot the main ceremony with? Film. No way would I have trusted it to a camera with 5MP 1/1.8" CCD.

The conditions were horrible (raining out, dark skies, ceremony under a Gazeebo in shadows overlooking a river, backlit due to light coming in through the opening in back of the Gazeebo, etc.). In these conditons, a higher ISO speed is not optional, and I needed every bit of dynamic range I could get.

I can imagine some "newbie" trying to get decent pics from a 7.2 Megapixel Pocket cam in these conditions.Especially sincethe manufacturer told them that it would be able take take "breathtaking, near-professional-quality photos"

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2004, 9:59 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

This is a very interesting thread. I know it's a little old but after reading I had a question...

In your collective experiece, there has to be a rough "rule of thumb" way of indexing an optimal megapixel to sensor size ratio. Any ideas?

OBTW - somewhere in here someone mentioned that big-zoom with "IS" will be coming out to appease the "soccer moms". Another talked about a Panasonic model (not the Lumix line, see next). Panasonic has a whole line of big zoom (12X optical) with IS. I own one - a 2 megapixel FZ-1v2 (v2 gives you aperture and shutter priority modes, courtesy of a frimware hack...) It has its limitations but I have been quite pleased its image quality in all reasonable lighting situations. I like to shoot candids with natural light, indoors. Usually I set ISO to 200 (gasp!) but I find Neat Image does a nice job cleaning things up to the point that I have a beautiful 8 1/2 X 11 borderless (res'd up to 260 ppi using stepped interpolation, and sharpened with Nic) that gets oohs and ahhs from guests...
NickTrop 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 12:13 AM.