You know its coming....Canon's copycat RX100

Started Dec 5, 2012 | Discussions thread
Dimitri Khoz Contributing Member • Posts: 943
Re: Canon

howardroark wrote:

Dimitri,

The SX230 shoots at a native 4000X3000 pixels. 1600X1200 is a huge downsize. That's 1.92MP versus the native 12MP. While an 8X10 might look alright it is almost certain that a 4000X3000 will look better depending on the quality of the printing process. At an optimum 300dpi an 8X10 should be 3000X2400, making the original file much closer to optimum quality. You can't downsize a huge file down to a postage stamp and then act like saying "wow, that's great for its size" has any meaning at all. The human mind has got awesome interpolation built-in but actual visual accuity and printing potential are capable of producing detail that is actually there rather than being required to imagine it. Nobody in their right mind takes a 12 or 18MP camera and sets it to shoot at anything other than full resolution. 2MP being 1/6th of 12MP would you be happy knowing that you're getting $40 of value from a $240 camera also? The conversion might not be quite directly proportional like that, but it serves as a good exaggeration in the same spirit as judging a 2MP 8X10 as good rather than juding a 12MP 8X10 as amazing when that potential does exist.

Howard, results from almost any camera, even some DSLRs will not look good at ISO1600 when pixelpeep to 100%.

12Mp mean 3000 lines per height on any sensor - no matter full frame or 1/2.3' one.

But even the best full frame DSLRs like 22Mp Canon 5D Mark3 can not deliver 3000 lph at ISO1600,

there is no need to ask the same from 12Mp postmarked sized 1/2.3' Canon SX230.



Canon 5D Mark3 Resolution vs ISO



http://www.photoreview.com.au/reviews/dslr-cameras/pro/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii#Full_Review

Now let's go back to SX230.

I downscaled its output by factor 2x, reducing the size in half vertically and horisontally.

Here is 2000x1500 result after I run my NR workflow ober it.

http://i.imgbox.com/acmFadtI.jpg

2000x1500 is sufficient resolution for full screen view and most casual print sizes.

Howard, admit, this picture looks really good for ISO1600 from a 1/2.3' compact.

Great details for such high ISO and low noise directly rivaling any 1/1.7' compact.

1/2.3' BSI CMOS in action.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow