Sensor Editorial

[Kenneth Sky]

Michael
Bravo for todays editorial calling for a halt in the megapixel race and a concentration on improving the pixel quality in digicams. It takes a publisher not beholden to advertising to make the comments. If for no other reason ( and there are many others including the informative LLVJ), I for one, shall continue to support this site.
Ken

[Ray]

Michael
Bravo for todays editorial calling for a halt in the megapixel race and a concentration on improving the pixel quality in digicams. It takes a publisher not beholden to advertising to make the comments. If for no other reason ( and there are many others including the informative LLVJ), I for one, shall continue to support this site.
Ken
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74372\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ken,
I take it you are referring to Michael's quick takes on the Panasonic DMC-FZ50 and LX2.

I tend to agree that the megapixel race in P&S digicams is driven by marketing to trap the technological unwary into thinking they might be getting a camera that is fundamentally as good as a DSLR with the same number of pixels, but without the major features of a DSLR such as interchangeable lenses.

Having recently become aware of the existence of Fujifilm's 6mp FinePix F30, which uses advanced technology to reach new levels of low noise at high ISOs, I briefly considered buying one. Being able to take usable images at f2.8 and ISO 800, which would have the same DoF as full frame 35mm at f11, or 1.6 crop format at f6.3, seemed a very worthwhile feature.

If this camera had only 3mp, using the same technology, I think that ISO 800 really would be usable and that such a camera might rival the quality of Canon's first DSLR, the D30, and be quite adequate for A4 size prints. Better still, with the fewer but larger (and less resolution-demanding) pixels, they could afford to include an f1.2 lens, maybe   .

[32BT]

I tend to agree that the megapixel race in P&S digicams is driven by marketing to trap the technological unwary into thinking they might be getting a camera that is fundamentally as good as a DSLR with the same number of pixels, but without the major features of a DSLR such as interchangeable lenses.

Having recently become aware of the existence of Fujifilm's 6mp FinePix F30, which uses advanced technology to reach new levels of low noise at high ISOs, I briefly considered buying one. Being able to take usable images at f2.8 and ISO 800, which would have the same DoF as full frame 35mm at f11, or 1.6 crop format at f6.3, seemed a very worthwhile feature.

If this camera had only 3mp, using the same technology, I think that ISO 800 really would be usable and that such a camera might rival the quality of Canon's first DSLR, the D30, and be quite adequate for A4 size prints. Better still, with the fewer but larger (and less resolution-demanding) pixels, they could afford to include an f1.2 lens, maybe   .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74396\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Don't be fooled by the lens and photographic control on these little critters. I have the F10, but the problem with these cameras is that there is indeed a distinct over-processed look to them, even at lower ISOs, and the lens sharpness just doesn't cut it while it's "only" 6mpx. Even a low ISO image, printed at relatively small size has an odd look of hardly noticeable but definite softness to it, and the in-camera processing tries hard to make up for any anomalies even if intentional.  

I think this type of processing makes these cameras very useful for vacation type of shoots with architecture, but for anything "natural" I have my doubts. In addition, I believe Bernard L had a less than favorable experience regarding the build quality for slightly rugged use.

The good thing though is that the Fuji never ever seems to need a recharge.