Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Digital M
From: JCB <jcb@visualimpressions.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:59:03 -0800
References: <026801c3f021$9c3f7fa0$6401a8c0@CCA4A5EF37E11E>

 >B. D. Colen said:
 >Subject: RE: Re: [Leica] Re: Digital M
 >
 > I'd certainly be happy with a good 5 mgp sensor - I'd like larger, but 5
 > can do just fine.<<<<<<


Then at 08:05 PM 2/10/2004 -0800, Ted Grant wrote:

>So what am I missing in why everything should be bigger and more? Or is this
>just the typical call of society these days that bigger is always better,
>but in truth has no real relevance to the end product quality? Certainly up
>to say 16X19 prints.
>
>ted


You are not missing anything, Ted. It is no longer the sensor size in 
pixels, it is how sophisticated the interpolation and sharpening software is.

Larger sensors (more pixels) provide more data and make it easier for the 
firmware/software to do their magic. But, as I said.... (re-read the first 
sentence.)

Larger _physical_ sensor sizes will make your M & R lenses more true to 
their actual focal length.

JB

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> (RE: Re: [Leica] Re: Digital M)