Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 21, 2006, 7:33 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

The Samsung GX-10 and the Pentax K10D seem very much alike. However, that should probably come as no big surprise. Has anyone read about who is making the chip for these two cameras? A month or so ago, there was some speculation that it would be a Samsung chip and NOT a Sony Chip?

MT/Sarah


mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 21, 2006, 8:45 AM   #2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

sarah,
what is the Samsung GX-10??? i can't find any info about it..

roy
  Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2006, 8:48 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Well, same thing>>>

Quote:

Pre-Photokina 2006: Samsung has apparently 'announced' the GX-10 digital SLR. This camera, rather unsurprisingly is in reality the Pentax K10D with its logos replaced. Hence a ten megapixel digital SLR with built-in shake reduction, dust 'shake' removal, weather sealing and unique exposure modes. We received no information on this camera from Samsung, all we have at this point is a press release which popped up two hours after news first broke, which is amazing considering how Samsung keep telling us they want to be taken more seriously on dpreview. (05:20 GMT)




Samsung GX-10

Sensor size A: 6.3 million pixels CCD [23.5 x 15.7 mm]

Sensor size B: 10.8 million pixels CCD [23.5 x 15.7 mm](!)

Seems like they deliberately cramped in extra 4.5 million pixels on the same CCD.

BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2006, 9:20 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
rfortson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 349
Default

BenjaminXYZ wrote:
Quote:
Seems like they deliberately cramped in extra 4.5 million pixels on the same CCD.

Gee, that never happens, except with every other 10MP camera out there. If it ain't full frame, then yes, they just crammed a few more pixels onto the same chip. Any wonder why the noise on these high MP cameras is bad?

(BTW, that first line was sarcasm. The internet is a hard place to read meaning.)
rfortson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2006, 9:50 AM   #5
Administrator
 
steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,535
Default

http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/sa...6_gx10_pr.html


steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2006, 10:11 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:

Gee, that never happens, except with every other 10MP camera out there. If it ain't full frame, then yes, they just crammed a few more pixels onto the same chip. Any wonder why the noise on these high MP cameras is bad?

(BTW, that first line was sarcasm. The internet is a hard place to read meaning.)



I have stated this issue many times.

Basically, the more pixels you put into a given area, the worse the S/N (Signal to noise ratio becomes), more pixels also generates more noise and heat (heat can create electronic noise), sensitivity to light will also drop, you lose higher ISO performance (that is why the native ISO level of the new SONY 10 MP CCD is from ISO 100 - ISO 1600 instead of the 200 - 3200); noticed the drop in sensitivity. Dynamic range (D.R.)will also belesser with the smaller pixels.

One of the mainarea(s) that separates the dSLRs/R1likecamera from the usual compact digicams & mega-zooms is the muchlarger photo-sites/photon-detectors in the image sensors of the dSLRs/R1, that is why we have superior I.Q. on the dSLRs & R1 fix lens pro. The greatest factor to consider a dSLR IMO, is for the high ISO performance. (That alone is the valid reason to go for one in my understanding)

Nowas I look at the pixels/photo-sites getting smaller on the dSLRs, I am also observing the effectsof thesmaller pixels/photo- detectors/photo-sites at work. (I have noticed quite a number of factors that I will only mention if there is interest) [Because I will definitely upload examples]

For easier understanding, read more about"Full Frame" image sensors and why are they so superior. F.F. sensors have great D.R., S/N ratio, very low noise levels, and great sensitivities to light. All this is down to the large photo-detectors (pixels) of the F.F. image sensors. The best the APS-C size image sensors can do now is to keep lower pixel counts IMO to maintain the larger photo-detectors.

You can never find any logicalfaults with the old Nikon 2 MP dSLR (I.Q. wise) with the same sizeCCD sensor as today's APS-C dSLRs. But is seems that lately, we are finding problems with the current crop of 10 MP dSLRs [in terms of high ISO performance]. (Againwith the similar dimension CCDsince the 2 MP one)

Sensor size A: 6.3 million pixels CCD [23.5 x 15.7 mm]

Sensor size B: 10.8 million pixels CCD [23.5 x 15.7 mm](!)

Sensor size C: 2.7 million pixels CCD [23.7 x 15.5 mm (Nikon DX)] (SONY CCD)





BenjaminXYZ 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 11:30 PM.