PMA 2009

[BernardLanguillier]

This *seems* reasonable, since improvements in areas other than pixel count are forthcoming, and being in a *hurry* to increase pixel counts is a non-starter. However, looking at actual 12 mp images, I see missing info I would like to have. Today, a photo of a photographer shooting a bride prepping for the big day, I clearly captured the bottom plate of the camera, as well as other details. But I can't read the bottom plate, even though the image is sharp, due to lack of pixels. So claiming that "12 mp is enough" for nearly any purpose other than abstract art is simply a denial of reality, literally and figuratively.

Nobody will disagree with you that more detail is a good thing if it can be had all other things being equal and sufficient.

My contention though is that properties like DR and noise are not sufficient with today's 10+ megapixel compact digital sensors, by a large margin. It would seem that Olympus product manager does agree with me on this, even for larger 4/3 sensors.

Cheers,
Bernard

[dalethorn]

Nobody will disagree with you that more detail is a good thing if it can be had all other things being equal and sufficient.
My contention though is that properties like DR and noise are not sufficient with today's 10+ megapixel compact digital sensors, by a large margin. It would seem that Olympus product manager does agree with me on this, even for larger 4/3 sensors.
Cheers,
Bernard

Olympus and Panasonic do seem to be leading the charge toward a higher quality pixel, or putting it differently, a more responsible allocation of features on cameras of 4/3 size and smaller. It will be interesting to see what Nikon and Canon do in response, since they're not butting heads with Oly and Pana just yet, in DSLR's anyway. I'm happiest when there is disagreement among the mfr's, since I don't trust "trends", where everyone thinks alike. Too many things go wrong that way.

[BJL]

...  claiming that "12 mp is enough" for nearly any purpose other than abstract art is simply a denial of reality ...

Dale,
    it amazes me how people keep reading far more into statements than is actually there, like the previous common misreading as "never more than 12MP for Olympus Four Thirds", now refuted.

The words of the Olympus rep., with my emphasis, are I think 12MP is covering most photo applications by the majority of users, which is a far less sweeping claim than your talk of  "nearly any purpose other than abstract art".
Olympus clearly acknowledges the obvious fact that some tasks are better suited to larger formats, like the previous comment that for more than 20MP, one would be better of with 24x36mm format. I imagine that Canon and Nikon have always acknowledged (at least to themselves) that MF can do some things better than 35mm format.

[eronald]

To use the PNCL single-pixel portable printer effectively for stitching you need considerable training, however some exceptional individuals are known to have produced  high quality renderings with such primitive equipment, albeit with hundreds of thousands of carefully manually stitched pixels.

Edmund

Yes, yes and most probably.

I was already thinking of investing in a UX21 and Painter 11 anticipating the day when carrying the tripod would become too much but your proposal is even more cost effective.

Now, I would argue that at most print sizes, the result of the 20 million shot stitch will be hard to distinguish from a uniform color computed to the average RGB value between the 4 patches... Either way, I will speak with the good folks at Autopano and PTgui to see if they can add 2x2 pixels images to their critical test samples.

Cheers,
Bernard