sensor size

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ziya, Dec 19, 2003.

  1. ziya

    ziya Guest

    Hi,

    what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    then 300D is garbage?
     
    ziya, Dec 19, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ziya

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Hi,
    >
    > what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > then 300D is garbage?
    >


    Nope. If that were to happen the 300D would still take the same high
    quality pictures that it does today. Besides, it will be a few years
    before you can buy a camera that uses a full frame (24x36) sensor for
    $1000.

    --
    __________________________________
    Todd Walker
    Canon 10D
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    http://www.twphotography.net
    __________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Dec 19, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ziya

    Dave Cohen Guest

    Follow that logic to it's ultimate conclusion, we wouldn't buy anything,
    would save a lot of money that way.
    Dave Cohen

    "Todd Walker" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > > sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > > then 300D is garbage?
    > >

    >
    > Nope. If that were to happen the 300D would still take the same high
    > quality pictures that it does today. Besides, it will be a few years
    > before you can buy a camera that uses a full frame (24x36) sensor for
    > $1000.
    >
    > --
    > __________________________________
    > Todd Walker
    > Canon 10D
    > http://www.toddwalker.net
    > http://www.twphotography.net
    > __________________________________
     
    Dave Cohen, Dec 19, 2003
    #3
  4. ziya

    Michael Guest

    If you act like you talk, I'm assuming you own nothing...not even the
    computer you are using. Usually really cheap people think like this.


    "ziya" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > then 300D is garbage?





    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
     
    Michael, Dec 19, 2003
    #4
  5. Correct me if I am wrong, but it sure looks to me that ziya, Todd, Dave
    and Michael are all saying the same thing.

    --
    Joseph E. Meehan

    26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math


    "ziya" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > then 300D is garbage?
     
    Joseph Meehan, Dec 19, 2003
    #5
  6. ziya

    Mark Herring Guest

    On 19 Dec 2003 07:55:09 -0800, (ziya) wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    >sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    >then 300D is garbage?

    A good camera does not become garbage when something better arrives.

    How many people need anything beyond 6 Mp?
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Dec 19, 2003
    #6
  7. ziya

    Alan Browne Guest

    ziya wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > then 300D is garbage?



    Yeah what if? It doesn't matter. The 300D will still work fine.

    24x36 @ 12Mpix at the 300D price point. Not very soon. Don't sweat it.

    And even if they did ... the 300D would not be "garbage".

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Dec 19, 2003
    #7
  8. ziya

    Michael Guest

    5 years ago how many people needed 64mb of RAM in their computer? It's like
    time...things will always change, get smaller, get larger, increase and
    decrease. Whatever makes the balance to market it and sell it.

    "Mark Herring" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 19 Dec 2003 07:55:09 -0800, (ziya) wrote:
    >
    > >Hi,
    > >
    > >what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > >sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > >then 300D is garbage?

    > A good camera does not become garbage when something better arrives.
    >
    > How many people need anything beyond 6 Mp?
    > **************************
    > Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    >





    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
     
    Michael, Dec 19, 2003
    #8
  9. According to Michael <>:
    > 5 years ago how many people needed 64mb of RAM in their computer?
    > It's like time...things will always change, get smaller, get larger,
    > increase and decrease. Whatever makes the balance to market it and
    > sell it.


    That's because those computers run software that continues to get more
    powerful. If new lenses were coming out that somehow needed more MP, then it
    would make sense that 6MP would become inadequate, but such is not the case.
    The pics that the 300D makes will be just as good in 10 years assuming it
    doesn't physically degrade.

    --
    eth'nT
    http://www.hydrous.net
    aim: courtarro
     
    Ethan Trewhitt, Dec 19, 2003
    #9
  10. ziya

    Mark B. Guest

    "ziya" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > what If next year Canon make new model of Eos for example 30D with
    > sensor size 24x35 mm, 12M pixel and 100% compatible all EF objectives?
    > then 300D is garbage?


    Well, my D30 still takes great pics despite having recently picked up a 10D.
    Besides, that's a silly supposition since Canon already has an 11mp
    full-frame (24x36mm) digi-SLR. The 300D is still a fine camera.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Dec 20, 2003
    #10
  11. ziya

    Guest

    In message <brvr8m$o4i$>,
    "Ethan Trewhitt" <> wrote:

    >That's because those computers run software that continues to get more
    >powerful. If new lenses were coming out that somehow needed more MP, then it
    >would make sense that 6MP would become inadequate, but such is not the case.


    Huh? The sharpest lenses resolve at least 2 to 3 times as much as the
    highest-density DSLR sensors.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 20, 2003
    #11
  12. Mark Herring wrote:

    > How many people need anything beyond 6 Mp?
    > **************************
    > Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".


    Hey Mark,
    I do. I often find my scanned 4x5 (inch) fuji velvia 650 Megabyte
    files do not have the resolution I want. Drum scanned at
    3300 dpi, that's only about 12,800 x 16,000 pixels (3.9x4.9
    inch true image area), thus 43x53 inch print at 300 ppi.
    The 4 foot x 5 foot prints need more detail. Hey, but it's
    pretty close, so I live with it most of the time. When I can't,
    I pull out the 8x10!

    Roger
    See images at http://www.clarkvision.com
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Dec 21, 2003
    #12
  13. ziya

    Mark Herring Guest

    On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:49:15 -0700, "Roger N. Clark (change username
    to rnclark)" <> wrote:

    >Mark Herring wrote:
    >
    >> How many people need anything beyond 6 Mp?
    >> **************************
    >> Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    >> Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".

    >
    >Hey Mark,
    >I do. I often find my scanned 4x5 (inch) fuji velvia 650 Megabyte
    >files do not have the resolution I want. Drum scanned at
    >3300 dpi, that's only about 12,800 x 16,000 pixels (3.9x4.9
    >inch true image area), thus 43x53 inch print at 300 ppi.
    >The 4 foot x 5 foot prints need more detail. Hey, but it's
    >pretty close, so I live with it most of the time. When I can't,
    >I pull out the 8x10!
    >
    >Roger
    >See images at http://www.clarkvision.com

    There's one.........;)

    Seriously---Hi Roger. Yes of course at the top end, 6 MP seems like a
    toy.
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Dec 21, 2003
    #13
  14. Mark Herring wrote:

    > On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:49:15 -0700, "Roger N. Clark (change username
    > to rnclark)" <> wrote:
    >
    > >Mark Herring wrote:
    > >
    > >> How many people need anything beyond 6 Mp?
    > >> **************************
    > >> Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > >> Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".

    > >
    > >Hey Mark,
    > >I do. I often find my scanned 4x5 (inch) fuji velvia 650 Megabyte
    > >files do not have the resolution I want. Drum scanned at
    > >3300 dpi, that's only about 12,800 x 16,000 pixels (3.9x4.9
    > >inch true image area), thus 43x53 inch print at 300 ppi.
    > >The 4 foot x 5 foot prints need more detail. Hey, but it's
    > >pretty close, so I live with it most of the time. When I can't,
    > >I pull out the 8x10!
    > >
    > >Roger
    > >See images at http://www.clarkvision.com

    > There's one.........;)
    >
    > Seriously---Hi Roger. Yes of course at the top end, 6 MP seems like a
    > toy.
    > **************************
    > Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".


    Mark,

    While the 6 MP range is superb (overkill?) for the vast consumer market,
    it is not enough for the advanced amateur or pro. I'm making really
    nice 11x14s and even 16x20s of wildlife images from the D60 and 10D.
    e.g. see: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird
    but I must upsample and work very hard for these prints to make
    them look good without interpolation artifacts. Really, 12 megapixel
    will match Fuji Velvia and that will be spectacular. See:
    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html

    But who says it must stop at that level? Why not 20 mpixels? 30?
    I know, the pixel size gets too small, but pixel size will be the limit
    in the 35mm class cameras, but the pixel count will rise to meet that
    limit, at least for the advanced amateur and pros who will pay the price.
    And there are a lot of advanced amateurs out there who will pay,
    professional engineers, doctors, etc who will spend $10k on a lens
    and will also spend $10k on a body!

    Perhaps I'll see you toward the end of January. I'll be in your area
    for cassini. I'll try to bring by some prints.

    Roger.
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Dec 21, 2003
    #14
  15. ziya

    Mark Herring Guest

    On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 07:30:58 -0700, "Roger N. Clark (change username
    to rnclark)" <> wrote:

    >Mark Herring wrote:
    >
    >> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:49:15 -0700, "Roger N. Clark (change username
    >> to rnclark)" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Mark Herring wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> How many people need anything beyond 6 Mp?
    >> >> **************************
    >> >> Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    >> >> Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    >> >
    >> >Hey Mark,
    >> >I do. I often find my scanned 4x5 (inch) fuji velvia 650 Megabyte
    >> >files do not have the resolution I want. Drum scanned at
    >> >3300 dpi, that's only about 12,800 x 16,000 pixels (3.9x4.9
    >> >inch true image area), thus 43x53 inch print at 300 ppi.
    >> >The 4 foot x 5 foot prints need more detail. Hey, but it's
    >> >pretty close, so I live with it most of the time. When I can't,
    >> >I pull out the 8x10!
    >> >
    >> >Roger
    >> >See images at http://www.clarkvision.com

    >> There's one.........;)
    >>
    >> Seriously---Hi Roger. Yes of course at the top end, 6 MP seems like a
    >> toy.
    >> **************************
    >> Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    >> Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".

    >
    >Mark,
    >
    >While the 6 MP range is superb (overkill?) for the vast consumer market,
    >it is not enough for the advanced amateur or pro. I'm making really
    >nice 11x14s and even 16x20s of wildlife images from the D60 and 10D.
    >e.g. see: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird
    >but I must upsample and work very hard for these prints to make
    >them look good without interpolation artifacts. Really, 12 megapixel
    >will match Fuji Velvia and that will be spectacular. See:
    >http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
    >
    >But who says it must stop at that level? Why not 20 mpixels? 30?
    >I know, the pixel size gets too small, but pixel size will be the limit
    >in the 35mm class cameras, but the pixel count will rise to meet that
    >limit, at least for the advanced amateur and pros who will pay the price.
    >And there are a lot of advanced amateurs out there who will pay,
    >professional engineers, doctors, etc who will spend $10k on a lens
    >and will also spend $10k on a body!
    >
    >Perhaps I'll see you toward the end of January. I'll be in your area
    >for cassini. I'll try to bring by some prints.
    >
    >Roger.
    >
    >

    This is why film will never die--IMHO. Above a certain size, it will
    be REALLY HARD to get snapshot solid-state sensors---at any price.
    There will be a niche for line scan sensors for studio work, and there
    will always be film and scanners--at least in our lifetimes
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Dec 21, 2003
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Steven M. Scharf

    D-SLR Sensor Resolution and Sensor Size Comparison Size Matters!

    Steven M. Scharf, May 14, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    5,500
    Georgette Preddy
    May 16, 2004
  2. IMKen
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    895
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Jun 22, 2004
  3. MeMe

    Dust on sensor, Sensor Brush = hogwash solution?

    MeMe, Feb 10, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    1,158
  4. ftran999
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    554
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota
    Feb 22, 2007
  5. stu7

    pixels / pixel size / sensor size

    stu7, Apr 25, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    614
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Apr 30, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page