I am not writing as a tech, but as a layperson. Your post seems at
least to contradict itself.
OK. For the lay person:
1. More MP does not equal more quality
2. X3 and Bayer sensors are different enough that there is no
simple description of how they relate to each other on a MP x MP
basis.
3. Buy the one that produces the images that look best to you.
What I've been able to get out of listening to techs is that the
Foveon chip gives you true data and the bayer chip does much more
interpolation.
First X3 does not give you "true" data. It only gives you data from
3 different color channels from a single location. Mosaic sensors
use data from a single location plus some additional nearby
locations. However, for comparable price, you can currently get
twice as many mosaic locations.
Which produces better photos? See 1, 2, & 3 above.
Well here you lose me. My point is that the standard rating
exagerates the existing bayer pattern chip.
Since the standard rating is for mosaic sensors, it better to say
that the X3 technology is "underrated". I'm not going to get into a
discussion as exactly by how much because the only reasonable
answer is "it depends."
How different companies assemble their mosaic is beside the point.
No, it's precisely the point. Theoretical cameras can only take
theoretical pictures. Exactly how much data a camera recovers from
its sensor depends on the implementation. It even depends on the
type of scene that you are photographing.
IOW the ratings are misleading.
That's like saying a car's engine displacement is misleading
because it does not tell you how fast it goes. (X3 = turbo? ;-).
It's only misleading if you don't know what it means.
The top of your post and the bottom of your post are in
contradiction. I realise you disagree, but that's the way it reads.
The point I was trying to clarify is that there is only one
"interpolation" step performed. Your description implied that
both resolution and color were interpolated separately and that was
inaccurate.
--
Erik
