Seems like Canon have been listening to complains about the lack of RAW mode in their compact cameras during the last couple of years. On the other hand: 12 Mp in a compact is strange when their 40D DSLR with the much bigger sensor has 10 Mp. Are the "consumers" still impressed, when they hear about more and more pixels? Do they never shoot with high ISO in low light?[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134263\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The big difference between Canon CMOS DSLRs and CCD compacts is that CCDs can be designed with very little little loss of photon capture due to smaller pixels.
Believe it or not, a compact like the Panasonic FZ50 captures as many photons per mm, maximum, as the 1Dmk2 does. It does it at almost a stop higher quantum efficiency, so the Panasonic does it at ISO while the 1Dmk2 does it at ISO 50.
There really is little or no gain in image shot noise making a compact 12MP vs 10MP or 8MP in the same sensor size. Unfortunately, manufacturers see the users as 100%-view pixel-peepers, and even when not viewing at 100%, most image-viewing software uses downsizing algorithms that are quick and dirty, and emphasize some original pixels over others, or even ignore many of them completely, increasing the image noise. What you get is an attempt to hide the inevitable noise of small sensors and small photosites with heavy-handed noise-reductions that discard as much detail as they do noise, and make the images look like impressionistic paintings or cartoons instead of photographs.
If our monitors had totally flexible analog resolution, and could include every original-resolution imagepixel with equal weight on the screen, and if printers used error diffusion at the dot level instead of a tile/array, then I doubt we'd be seeing this ridiculous noise reduction.
