|
Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
|
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
"RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b2f6421-834c-42b6-9826-1464f79aca9d@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...unches-DMC-GF5 "The LUMIX GF5 features a newly developed 12.1-megapixel Live MOS sensor and redesigned Venus Engine...." |
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
On Apr 5, 11:07*am, "David J Taylor" <david-
tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:4b2f6421-834c-42b6-9826-1464f79aca9d@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > > >http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...unches-DMC-GF5 > > "The LUMIX GF5 features a newly developed 12.1-megapixel Live MOS sensor > and redesigned Venus Engine...." Then it begs the question, why did they stick at 12mp? Why not just go 16mp for all the m4/3rds units? |
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Apr 5, 11:07*am, "David J Taylor" <david- >tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:4b2f6421-834c-42b6-9826-1464f79aca9d@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... >> >> >http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...unches-DMC-GF5 >> >> "The LUMIX GF5 features a newly developed 12.1-megapixel Live MOS sensor >> and redesigned Venus Engine...." > >Then it begs the question, why did they stick at 12mp? Why not just >go 16mp for all the m4/3rds units? Perhaps the performance of the 12 MP sensor will tell us why. When Panasonic developed the 16 MP Live MOS sensor for m4/3, it offered a two-way improvement on the original 12.3 MP sensor; greater resolution (obviously) and better control of noise at up to ISO 1600. What did not improve was dynamic range (DR), which continues to be a weakness of m4/3 cameras. The current 12 MP and 16 MP m4/3 sensors typically offer about 10 stops of DR, whereas 12 stops is typical of APS-C sensors. The best APS-C and full frame sensors deliver about 14 stops. A 4-stop improvement makes a substantial difference. So the question is, does the new sensor offer a more balanced combination of resolution, noise and dynamic range? I hope so, because even the new Olympus E-M5 (first in the OM-D range) has only around ten stops of DR, which is disappointing. I think I would rather see a new 12 MP sensor with more dynamic range than the original 12 MP sensor than the 16 MP sensor with the same dynamic range. |
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
Rich <none@nowhere.com> wrote:
>Bruce <docnews2011@gmail.com> wrote in >news:g9trn792ntmeiaclvlt2sm459nq6tb1uh9@4ax.com : >> >> Perhaps the performance of the 12 MP sensor will tell us why. >> >> When Panasonic developed the 16 MP Live MOS sensor for m4/3, it >> offered a two-way improvement on the original 12.3 MP sensor; greater >> resolution (obviously) and better control of noise at up to ISO 1600. >> >> What did not improve was dynamic range (DR), which continues to be a >> weakness of m4/3 cameras. The current 12 MP and 16 MP m4/3 sensors >> typically offer about 10 stops of DR, whereas 12 stops is typical of >> APS-C sensors. The best APS-C and full frame sensors deliver about 14 >> stops. A 4-stop improvement makes a substantial difference. >> >> So the question is, does the new sensor offer a more balanced >> combination of resolution, noise and dynamic range? I hope so, >> because even the new Olympus E-M5 (first in the OM-D range) has only >> around ten stops of DR, which is disappointing. >> >> I think I would rather see a new 12 MP sensor with more dynamic range >> than the original 12 MP sensor than the 16 MP sensor with the same >> dynamic range. >> >> > >I don't see the difference as offering any greater DR. The Olympus >sensors, or how they're used have always had greater DR in the lower >zones than APS sensors. Ironically, the higher noise level in the >shadows makes it undesirable to raise illumination levels so that extra >DR is wasted. Also, the so-called 14 levels of DR in the APS sensors is >something you might not want to exploit in all situations. They achieve >that by DR expansion which flattens images considerably, making them look >lifeless. I rarely used that feature on Nikons. That reads like a collection of random phrases culled from Google searches, then put together to make an incoherent mess. >Having said that, the >normal DR of a Nikon-Sony APS sensor is noticeably wider in visible DR >than the 4/3rds stuff. Well, that was exactly my point, wasn't it? |
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
On Apr 6, 5:53*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rich <n...@nowhere.com> wrote: > >Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote in > >news:g9trn792ntmeiaclvlt2sm459nq6tb1uh9@4ax.com : > > >> Perhaps the performance of the 12 MP sensor will tell us why. > > >> When Panasonic developed the 16 MP Live MOS sensor for m4/3, it > >> offered a two-way improvement on the original 12.3 MP sensor; greater > >> resolution (obviously) and better control of noise at up to ISO 1600. > > >> What did not improve was dynamic range (DR), which continues to be a > >> weakness of m4/3 cameras. *The current 12 MP and 16 MP m4/3 sensors > >> typically offer about 10 stops of DR, whereas 12 stops is typical of > >> APS-C sensors. *The best APS-C and full frame sensors deliver about 14 > >> stops. *A 4-stop improvement makes a substantial difference. > > >> So the question is, does the new sensor offer a more balanced > >> combination of resolution, noise and dynamic range? *I hope so, > >> because even the new Olympus E-M5 (first in the OM-D range) has only > >> around ten stops of DR, which is disappointing. > > >> I think I would rather see a new 12 MP sensor with more dynamic range > >> than the original 12 MP sensor than the 16 MP sensor with the same > >> dynamic range. > > >I don't see the difference as offering any greater DR. *The Olympus > >sensors, or how they're used have always had greater DR in the lower > >zones than APS sensors. *Ironically, the higher noise level in the > >shadows makes it undesirable to raise illumination levels so that extra > >DR is wasted. *Also, the so-called 14 levels of DR in the APS sensors is > >something you might not want to exploit in all situations. *They achieve > >that by DR expansion which flattens images considerably, making them look > >lifeless. I rarely used that feature on Nikons. > > That reads like a collection of random phrases culled from Google > searches, then put together to make an incoherent mess. You are the one defending the 12mp sensor. I think the like 10mp unit in the Nikon, it's time has passed. The Panasonic sensors are different from the Sony sensors and simply enlarging the pixels a bit likely will not help them expand DR noticeably. Listen to the Leica people, they would like us to ditch both an go back to Kodak... |
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
On Apr 6, 1:24*pm, Bowser <ooo...@mmmmyyy.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 12:14:26 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >On Apr 5, 11:07*am, "David J Taylor" <david- > >tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>news:4b2f6421-834c-42b6-9826-1464f79aca9d@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com.... > > >> >http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04...unches-DMC-GF5 > > >> "The LUMIX GF5 features a newly developed 12.1-megapixel Live MOS sensor > >> and redesigned Venus Engine...." > > >Then it begs the question, why did they stick at 12mp? *Why not just > >go 16mp for all the m4/3rds units? > > Product differentiation? Why buy the more expensive GX1 if you can get > the same IQ in a lowly GF5? I'm going to qualify what I said. IF this camera displays the same behaviour as the other 12mp Panasonics (namely, being more sensitive and therefore capable of the same shot at lower ISOs than the 16mp sensors) then it could be valuable. If they've reduced the noise on this like they did the 16mp shots relative to the old 12mp sensor, then theoretically, this new 12mp sensor will be capable of delivering BETTER low-light performance than the new 16mp sensors, even if you downsize the 16mp shots or upsize the 12mp shots. We'll see. |
Re: Panasonic GF3. Attempting to burn off last stocks of 12mp sensor?
In article <H8ednTy7FN1w1ePSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@giganews.com>, Rich
<none@nowhere.com> wrote: > I don't see the difference as offering any greater DR. The Olympus > sensors, or how they're used have always had greater DR in the lower > zones than APS sensors. you don't have more dynamic range in shadows than you do in highlights. dynamic range is the difference between maximum and minimum. > Ironically, the higher noise level in the > shadows makes it undesirable to raise illumination levels so that extra > DR is wasted. Also, the so-called 14 levels of DR in the APS sensors is > something you might not want to exploit in all situations. They achieve > that by DR expansion which flattens images considerably, making them look > lifeless. nonsense. they get 14 stops because the equipment is capable of 14 stops, or whatever number it happens to be. > I rarely used that feature on Nikons. that's a different feature. > Having said that, the > normal DR of a Nikon-Sony APS sensor is noticeably wider in visible DR > than the 4/3rds stuff. yes it is. physics is funny that way. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.