Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-01-2008, 05:26 AM   #16
Veteran Member
ftpaddict's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yurp
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,669
Hee hee hee hee. Canon need to pay more for advertising.

11-01-2008, 03:27 PM   #17
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,683
It seems to me that people over at DPR, the reviewers included, are making a little too much of the results of their tests, saying things about it "clearly showing the brick wall of preformance limited by pixel density (paraphrased)."

That's a little grandiose for a conclusion based on the test results of a single camera, especially given that it's the first APS-C camera we've seen go over 15mp, so there's nothing to compare with. And given how well the K20D does when operating so close to that "performance limit" they're talking about.
11-24-2008, 10:59 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
Still stuck on pixel density.. Obviously mavericks can't read (or since their maverics refuse to read and believe)...... Give it up. Pixel density increase is a good thing.
DP Review's "belief" in pixel density problems is a myth...

Think you should read this thread and learn what pixel density really means.. Be sure to follow all the links.
Pixel density revisited: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review
As for the evidence, Emil (http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/) has pointed you to a post of his, there's a long series of posts which you didn't follow, but did discuss and present the evidence in some detail, there's John Sheehy's demonstration under the title 'the joy of pixel density' , and finally there have been extensive discussions of the physics behind it, which back up the position that in theory there is no causal link between pixel density and final image noise content at any given image size (with the caveat that there are noise effects such as random telegraph noise, which come into play at very small geometries). These discussions included a number of people who are research physicists (not me, I hasten to add), and included Eric Fossum.
Your urban legends are showing again.
Re: No really, it isn't: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review
When one does this exercise, it becomes apparent that the main factor in image noise is sensor size. The result is largely independent of MP count for a fixed sensor size. Pixel density, which is sensor area divided by MP count, is poorly correlated to noise because both MP count and sensor size will vary from camera to camera, but only one of those factors is tied to noise level.
Read carefully and you may yet learn weedhopper......
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/40091-could-someon...vantage-2.html
Thanks for your links in that thread
11-25-2008, 02:18 AM   #19
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
It seems to me that people over at DPR, the reviewers included, are making a little too much of the results of their tests, saying things about it "clearly showing the brick wall of preformance limited by pixel density (paraphrased)."

That's a little grandiose for a conclusion based on the test results of a single camera, especially given that it's the first APS-C camera we've seen go over 15mp, so there's nothing to compare with. And given how well the K20D does when operating so close to that "performance limit" they're talking about.
For all intent and purpose the K20D is effectively a 15 MP camera, or very close to it. Total pixels 15.10 MP.

Ben

11-25-2008, 07:27 PM   #20
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
As you stated, it's a physics problem. And the laws of physics don't change for pixel density.
Unless the photos get smaller due to global warming and the diffraction to all light from the Sun being filtered through more methane. ;-)
11-26-2008, 09:26 AM   #21
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,683
Ah, but you see the effects would be offset by the thermal expansion of the photosites due to raised temperatures.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
hand, pentax news, pentax rumors, review
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do custom "artistic" or even "funny" lens caps evenexist? lovemehate Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 35 02-10-2016 09:10 AM
Sports "Highside Exit" took 1st Place in DPReview "Missed It by THAT much, Part 1" Challenge MRRiley Post Your Photos! 27 02-21-2010 08:26 PM
K1000 body "ding" - defect, accident, or "feature"? dannywho Pentax Film SLR Discussion 6 10-08-2009 06:11 PM
K20d-Frame Count on panals..works w/"M" & "P" mode only? arbib Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 08-28-2009 05:47 PM
"Hunger for a DA*50-135?" or "The DA*50-135 as a bird lens!" or "Iron age birds?" Douglas_of_Sweden Post Your Photos! 4 08-13-2008 06:09 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:32 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top