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: Re: [Leica] Re: Digital M
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:52:28 -0800

On 2/11/04 8:59 AM, "JCB" <jcb@visualimpressions.com> wrote:

>> 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
Sounds like A Fuji S2 user to me!

Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland, Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/Catagorypages/PersonalWork.html




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