....while it
is possible to upsample, uprezz, interpolate, whatever you want
to call it to get to big file size equivalents, there is always an
advantage to a real capture size that is higher in MP count.
Absolutely correct. No argument. In fact the person who started this thread is the first one that I have seen that claimed the Fuji delivered a full 12mp of resolution. Yes, there are 12mp of sensors, but the resolution tops out at a roughly 8mp equivalent. There is much disagreement as to whether this is just an interpolation "artifact" or whether it is actual information. Either way, it prints up like a bigger sensor than Phil emphaticly states. So, Voodoo or Doodoo, you take your pick.
The S2 and S3 are unique cameras with interesting sensor
designs,and they make good images. But we've got to be careful to
differentiate between a six million pixel photosite camera, like
the S2 and S3. Phil Askey says the S3 is a SIX megapixel
camera...not a 12, but a SIX MP camera. Phil Askey has posted that
here,in this very forum, with a very emphatic statement. And yet,
others continue to try and build the S3 up as a "12 megapixel
camera".
Yes, yes, Phil has had a bug up his nose about Fuji for some time. No reasonable person would claim to get a full 12mp out of either camera, but the fact remains that it does bring a bit of extra something to the table.
Now - let's keep this in perspective, the tangible differences between an 8mp and 6mp image are not that huge. I had a friend who just bought a 20D and he kept harping on about 8mp, 8mp. 8mp. I finally showed him how much larger his print would be and he stopped bragging. Yes, more is more, and size matters, but you really need to double the actual pixel data to get your first worth while jump in resolution (one that is worth bragging about - in my opinion). Then we get people who start talking about one camera "blowing away" another because of twice the actual pixels. Just keep it in perspective, ok? I know that we all love to obsess over details, but really....
So, if one wishes, he can lull himself into calling the S2 and the
S3 "twelve megapixel cameras'. But, as Greg Beasley's post points
out, the S2 comes up far,far short of a 22 MP MF back's quality,
even though the S2 file is over twice as large (144 megabytes
versus roughly 65 megabytes) in storage space.
What sense is there in comparing a 22mp medium format back with an essentially 8mp camera. Who in their right mind would claim that a fuji could stand up to that?
Well, you can lull yourself into calling the S3 a 6mp camera if you want to, but there are 12 million sensors on the chip, it's just that half of them are devoted to capturing extra dynamic range, not pure resolution. A not insignificant advantage in my very humble opinion. Yes, with very careful exposure and post processing, you can get close with the 1DsII, maybe even the 1D2, but the S3 delivers it on a silver platter, and would you like some champagne with that, sir?
Just look at the new Canon 5D samples halfway down this fellows page (and note the modest statement at the beginning)
"I have held in my hands today possibly the "best" camera yet available to humanity."
His samples almost had me falling out of my chair. Such a big sensor, so many pixels, such a poor choice of tone curve..... That camera just has to be able to do better than this.
http://www.virtualtraveller.org/5dv20d/5dv20d.htm
--
Best regards,
Jonathan Kardell
'Enlightenment isn't anywhere near as much fun as I thought it would be'
