Megapixel Myth?

tdkd13 said:

And yet, when faced with the glaring fallacy of your entire point

Click to expand...

The only ones who hang on a glaring fallacy are the megapixel mythologists. Genuine pixels delivered by the data source are, must be, more acurate representing the scene taken than even the best interpolations done by a printing machine. So there is no glimmer of denial. It is just that the megapixel mythologists are wrong as soon as the physical resolution needed for a print is higher than what the source delivers.

Enjoy the Sunday.

--
Some pics made with the S9500: http://www.elwu.de => gallery one and gallery two

delete said:

delete said:

And yet, when faced with the glaring fallacy of your entire point

Click to expand...

The only ones who hang on a glaring fallacy are the megapixel
mythologists. Genuine pixels delivered by the data source are, must
be, more acurate representing the scene taken than even the best
interpolations done by a printing machine. So there is no glimmer
of denial. It is just that the megapixel mythologists are wrong as
soon as the physical resolution needed for a print is higher than
what the source delivers.

Enjoy the Sunday.

--
Some pics made with the S9500: http://www.elwu.de => gallery one and
gallery two

Click to expand...

If you are trying to convince us/yourself that the 9mp sensor on the fuji S9500 is better than a 6mp sensor on an SLR...it aint happening!

Not at low or high ISO..(esp at high ISO...)

Why....pixel pitch is so much bigger on a larger sensor...

Now the fuji makes nice prints dont get me wrong, but to make a call on the number alone...well thats just a bit silly isnt it..not just my view, just about anyone else who knows the story...

Keep kidding yourself...fuji loves you....

Member said:

If you are trying to convince us/yourself that the 9mp sensor on
the fuji S9500 is better than a 6mp sensor on an SLR...

Click to expand...

I never tried that. And would never try such a foolish thing. It were other people in this forum who started to compare incomparable things, e.g. the S9500 with a DSLR.

--
Some pics made with the S9500: http://www.elwu.de => gallery one and gallery two

what next, cats and dogs living together?

What you said here I agree with, my problem wiyth yoru argument was that you cannot remove the only necessary factor in an equation and then ask an opinion. Unless of course your asking the question is 9 bigger than 6. Pixel quality must be taken into account in order for the discussion to have any meaning at all, removing that factor to not overburden the discussion simply reduces the discussion to is 9 bigger than 6 which is needless.

After all this time you must have gotten that, I actually think we are much closer to agreeing here, if the post I am responding to right here is how you fell than I would say we agree 100%
Take care, Ted

delete said:

delete said:

And yet, when faced with the glaring fallacy of your entire point

Click to expand...

The only ones who hang on a glaring fallacy are the megapixel
mythologists. Genuine pixels delivered by the data source are, must
be, more acurate representing the scene taken than even the best
interpolations done by a printing machine. So there is no glimmer
of denial. It is just that the megapixel mythologists are wrong as
soon as the physical resolution needed for a print is higher than
what the source delivers.

Enjoy the Sunday.

--
Some pics made with the S9500: http://www.elwu.de => gallery one and
gallery two

Click to expand...

--
http://photobucket.com/albums/y260/tdkd13/

delete said:

delete said:

If you are trying to convince us/yourself that the 9mp sensor on
the fuji S9500 is better than a 6mp sensor on an SLR...

Click to expand...

I never tried that. And would never try such a foolish thing. It
were other people in this forum who started to compare incomparable
things, e.g. the S9500 with a DSLR.

--
Some pics made with the S9500: http://www.elwu.de => gallery one and
gallery two

Click to expand...

You don't have to. Fuji set themselves to do that comparison

http://www2.fujifilm.co.uk/ ... ... features/fuji_cameras/index.php?article=51

Which is way too unrealistic in my opinion and yes a tad foolish.

Apparently the URL above is on the block list, or maybe you need to log in to myFuji.com but this is what they say there:

"Fuji has announced a powerful new camera to get the enthusiasts amongst you excited! The FinePix S9500 is set to put a cat amongst the pigeons and give digital SLRs a real run for their money. Fuji has really gone all out with this camera, which raises the bar offering D-SLR handling, features and picture quality in a compact all-in-one body.
..........."

Regards,

Provia_fan

Hello,

Provia_fan said:

You don't have to.

Click to expand...

Never would.

Provia_fan said:

Fuji set themselves to do that comparison

Click to expand...

Fuji marketing in the US seems to be a little, well, American style...

Provia_fan said:

Which is way too unrealistic in my opinion and yes a tad foolish.

Click to expand...

Yes it is, no doubt about that! In Germany, Fuji markets the S9500 as quote High-End camera in the compact class unquote (taken form the German Fuji web site). Which it is, no doubt as well.

Provia_fan said:

the pigeons and give digital SLRs a real run for their money. Fuji
has really gone all out with this camera, which raises the bar
offering D-SLR handling, features and picture quality in a compact
all-in-one body.

Click to expand...

That's plainly stupid and way off the reality. The S9500 is not comparable to a DSLR. Can't be. I start to believe that the way companies market their products is more down to earth over here in Germany than in the US. One reason may be that most Germans do not tend to believe a single word the marketing departments say but believe more in independent tests and, most of all, personal experience/judgement.

Thanks for this info, this puts a lot of things into perspective for me. For instance I could not for the life of me understand how seasoned photographers like Kim and Ted could compare the S9500 with a DSLR. Now it becomes, I think, clear: they took Fuji US by their promises.

Sorry.

--
Some pics made with the S9500: http://www.elwu.de => gallery one and gallery two

delete said:

For instance I could not for the life of me understand how
seasoned photographers like Kim and Ted could compare the S9500
with a DSLR. Now it becomes, I think, clear: they took Fuji US by
their promises.

Click to expand...

Please stop with all the condescension ... I've asked you multiple times and you seem entirely unable to resist.

I've had an epiphany:

I now realize that you consider mega-pixels to be freely available. That is, trading up to higher mega-pixels involves no trade-offs:

-- features are the same
-- pixel quality is the same
-- noise does not get bad, no matter how small the photosites get
-- there is no extra cost

Frankly, I do not live in that world. The mega-pixels have to come from somewhere. They cannot exist disembodied. And more mega-pixels of the same quality is rarely available without significant expenditure.

For example (Adorama):
D50 @ 6mp @ at $549
200D @ 10,2mp @ $1700
D2X @ 12.84mp @ $4450
RebelXT @ 8mp @ $695
5D @ 12.8mp @ $2900
1Ds Mk II @ 16.7mp @ $6900

Everyone has even agreed that more pixels of the same quality is better ... and you still go on insulting Ted and me.

You refuse to deal with the real issue ... where will these extra pixels come from?"

So your arguments remain devoid of any real content as far as I can see.

--
My gallery: http://letkeman.net/Photos
Fuji Finepix F11
Nikon D70s, Sigma 18-200, Nikkor 50mm 1.8D, Sigma 70-300APO

1) Ad hominem. Straw Man. Neither is germane to the discussion or my post.

2) Another ad hominem. While I can't speak for the other forumers, when I include extra information, it isn't because I assume the person is ignorant, but that the extra material might provide a better explanation of my viewpoint. Nor do I assume that the person is omniscient. As an example: At some point in this thread, someone (I cannot remember who) didn't know who Phil was and if the information about who he was contained within the original post it might have prevented some confusion and potential embarassment.

3) Appeal to authority. Straw man. Ad hominem yet again. Since you would like information about dMF backs and higher end dSLRs, I'd highly recommend reading the essay entitled Measuring Megabytes located at the Luminous Landscape. I'd link to it, but the url filter here is overbearing and a nuissance. There is even a dvd you can purchase containing the raw files from all of the shots taken. Here's a quote to pique your interest:

"So if we have a close race between a 39MP back's files and a 4X5" drum scan, where does that leave us? A traditional enlarger made print can't hope to compare, and so we now appear to have a new ball game, with top-tier medium format digital close to equaling 4x5" large format. And to my eyes images from the 16Mp Canon 1Ds MKII are awfully close to those from drum scanned 645 format Velvia. (Don't confuse the texture added by film grain with detail. Also, try different sharpening approaches with each and see the difference that this can make in perceived resolution)."

--
My gallery: http://letkeman.net/Photos
Fuji Finepix F11
Nikon D70s, Sigma 18-200, Nikkor 50mm 1.8D, Sigma 70-300APO

--
My gallery: http://letkeman.net/Photos
Fuji Finepix F11
Nikon D70s, Sigma 18-200, Nikkor 50mm 1.8D, Sigma 70-300APO