Originally posted by dosdan The size of the chain links seems to indicate the the FL is the same for both shots. I'm surprised that the quality of the lens in the the P&S didn't pole-axe it in this test. How did they produce a lens with such resolving power?
Dan.
That is exactly my point. Remember the good ol' film days? When we, minor beings using 35 mm cameras drooled over the Medium Format results?
During those days, the film was the same, just cutted differently (for 35 mm or medium format), but MF results were stunning in matters of resolution. Why? Because there was more film to capture the same image. If I remember correctly too, MF lenses even though had (still have) great resolution, but the 35 mm lenses had a lot better resolution. Things being equal (film), then the final images were a lot better in MF, just because there was more film.
Film grain was the same for both formats, but in 35 mm, film enlargment had to be a lot bigger to get the same size as mf negatives.
In the digital era, film no longer exists. Just sensors, which technically do not have "grain", just pixels. But as my test proves it, it really doesn't matter how many pixels there are. What matters is the pixel density on which to capture the image.
Consider this, the K200D is a 10 mpix camera. The K20D is a 14.6 megapix one. Both have the same sensor size (APS-C), which means, the K20D has tighter pixel density in order to fit that many pixels in the same sensor size. Think about the istD with 6 mpix? (I have one
) Which also means its sensor has bigger pixels.
In short words, what matter is pixel density to get detail. Of course, total pixel count matters a lot.
Full frame DSLR's with 12 to 14 mpix sensors will not give me more detail and sharpness as my K20D. The only pro is that will allow me to use my old FF glass to its full potential, but nothing more.
OTOH, give me an APS-C sensor with 42 mpix, then we are talking business. Technology exists to produce such pixel density (The optio wpi has it!
)
I rest my case. I am sure the guys at Pentax already know this. There is no need for FF to get the results we want. And BTW, I've been recently comparing some shots from my K20D with some old negative drum scans (Fuji Superia) (24 mpix scans), and to be honest I can see better detail from my K20D.
Robert B.