S602 better detail at 3mp or 6mp?

CJunior said:

Hi Everybody,
I read some past messages about the quality of S602 at 3mp and 6mp.
Some said that 6mp are interpolated so 3mp is better detailed, some
other said that the camera capture always at 6mp and then shrink
down at 3mp.

I taked pictures at 3mp and 6mp , I usually print pictures at
12x18cm on a Agfa D-Lab . I see no differences, but I don't tryed
yet to take the same picture with the two resolution.

As quality I set always FINE. I see that 6mp NORMAL files are big
as the 3mp FINE files, and the quality ?

So the question is an advantage to use 6mp Fine instead of using
3mp Fine to print pictures in 12x18cm ?

I'd like to listen other users about resolutiona nd quality
settings on S602.

best regards

If someone like to see my gallery
http://web.tiscali.it/cjnet/

Click to expand...

Doug Kerr said:

I anjoy your recent "takes" on this overall matter.

Gyorgy, I'm not sure I agree with this statement in your last post:

Gyorgy Abrusan said:

I don't believe that
they didn't know that the real H/V resolution of their cameras is
worse than 6mp conv. cam.

Click to expand...

Based on my recent analysis of the "rotated" sensor array (and in a
simplistic, geometric way only), the H/V resolution achieved with
the "rotated" 3MP sensor shoud be on a par with the H/V resolution
avieved with a conventional (non-rotated) 6MP sensor. The 45 degree
diagonal resolution, though, would be expected to be about half
that for a conventional 6MP sensor.

None of this intrudes into your overall observations, however.

Doug Kerr

Click to expand...

sg10 said:

Gyorgy Abrusan said:

I agre, the 6mp (and previously 4mp) marketing "tricks" probably
caused more harm to fuji than they expected. I don't believe that
they didn't know that the real H/V resolution of their cameras is
worse than 6mp conv. cam. I like the idea of rotated sensor, a
clever optimalisation of sensor efficiency, but the 4mp label on a
2mp camera (that performs close to 3) will cause that the real
advantages of the sensor will remain unnoticed, under the heavy
critics that proove that 2 isn't 4.

I like very much the fact that fuji cares about other aspects of
image quality than resolution.

Click to expand...

Me too, now if they would just stop the incessant distortions.

sg10146235 said:

They seem to be the only ones. But I
see again the same pixel count mess, because if I undestand well
their brochures, the combined information from S and R pixels will
produce one pixel as an output (since they are not equivalent). But
how this divided pixel structure will affect the interpolation
process?

Click to expand...

The real question is, are there two separate S and R pixels? If
you read their literature carefully, they tap dance around that.
They say, the HR version (of the S2 Pro) is "announced today."
Read carefully...

The SuperCCD4 SR is not "announced today," like the new HR CCD, but
rather it is a "new configuration."

Not 6.7 million "sensors," 6.7 million "pixels."

Not "has" 6.7 million," but "incorporates" 6.7 million.

Reference...

http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/PressCenterDetail.jsp?DBID=NEWS_526484

And isn't interesting that the SuperCCD SR has exactly the same
pixel count as the older SuperCCD3 in terms of S and R pixels
(3.35M x 2 = 6.7M), while the SuperCCD HR (the S2 Pro's true 6MP
CCD) has a different number of pixels, 6.63M? This proves they
aren't the same chip.

So does the careful use of the word "also" here...
"Also measuring 1/1.7" in size..."

I believe they are using the same exact SuperCCD3 chip, but double
pumping the exposure with a mini-bracket, then digitally combining
the resulting images. If you read their page with the most
liberal, sleezy lawyer interpretations of their words and diagrams,
you will see they never really deny this is what they are doing.
It would even explain the strange "mini- octagon" representation of
the both the S and the R pixel (not sensor), since they are only
portrayed as being symbolically distinct (seperated by time), not
topologically distinct. "See, we aren't being dishonest at all,
its all right there for the world to see."

Also note the "accumulated charge" diagrams. When S and R are
shown together, they have no choice but to make it clear the two
"pixels" (sort of shown as one sensor) accumulate their charges in
series, not in parallel. The S pixel doesn't gather any light
while the R pixel is operating. Yet the individual charge diagrams
above it seem to be designed to intentionally ditch that minor
little distinction ("but, but, but we are just showing them one at
a time, there").

Is the SuperCCD4 SR's 6MP "pixel" count the same, exact, recycled
hoax as SuperCCD3, using the same, exact unchanged 3 million site
sensor??

It sure looks like it.

sg10146235 said:

The number of possible mathematical tricks is much higher
here so I have no idea. Will see the reults in the reviews. And i
really hope that the performance will be comparable with the
claims. It would be a great step forward.

the funny thing is that this S R structure is very similar also to
the different photoreceptor types in our eyes, now we don't see
biological arguments ...marketing again....

Click to expand...

Right. And there is no mention of the fact that if they really did
add 3MP more sensors, which I don't think they did, stacking them
on top would produce a conventional X/Y aligned CCD grid.

Click to expand...

sg10146235 said:

The real question is, are there two separate S and R pixels? If
you read their literature carefully, they tap dance around that.
They say, the HR version (of the S2 Pro) is "announced today."
Read carefully...

Click to expand...

sg10146235 said:

The SuperCCD4 SR is not "announced today," like the new HR CCD, but
rather it is a "new configuration."

Not 6.7 million "sensors," 6.7 million "pixels."

Not "has" 6.7 million," but "incorporates" 6.7 million.

Reference...

http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/PressCenterDetail.jsp?DBID=NEWS_526484

And isn't interesting that the SuperCCD SR has exactly the same
pixel count as the older SuperCCD3 in terms of S and R pixels
(3.35M x 2 = 6.7M), while the SuperCCD HR (the S2 Pro's true 6MP
CCD) has a different number of pixels, 6.63M? This proves they
aren't the same chip.

Click to expand...

MikeBee said:

I may be mistaken but reading carefully I see no reference in your
quoted paragraphs about the S2 sized HR chip, this has not been
announced yet, the S2 uses a much bigger chip than the 1/1.7" in
the 602 601 as I understand it 23mm x 15mm , which was pictured
along side the 1/1.7" and 1/2.7" in Phil Askeys report on his vist
to the Fuji Factory, it's much much bigger.

Click to expand...

sg10 said:

MikeBee said:

I may be mistaken but reading carefully I see no reference in your
quoted paragraphs about the S2 sized HR chip, this has not been
announced yet, the S2 uses a much bigger chip than the 1/1.7" in
the 602 601 as I understand it 23mm x 15mm , which was pictured
along side the 1/1.7" and 1/2.7" in Phil Askeys report on his vist
to the Fuji Factory, it's much much bigger.

Click to expand...

You're right, the S2 chip is actually SuperCCD3. The announced
SuperCCD4 HR chip would be a distinct 6MP/12MP offering.

Click to expand...

MikeBee said:

sg10 said:

MikeBee said:

I may be mistaken but reading carefully I see no reference in your
quoted paragraphs about the S2 sized HR chip, this has not been
announced yet, the S2 uses a much bigger chip than the 1/1.7" in
the 602 601 as I understand it 23mm x 15mm , which was pictured
along side the 1/1.7" and 1/2.7" in Phil Askeys report on his vist
to the Fuji Factory, it's much much bigger.

Click to expand...

You're right, the S2 chip is actually SuperCCD3. The announced
SuperCCD4 HR chip would be a distinct 6MP/12MP offering.

Click to expand...

But my point is that you seemed to imply that the announced
6mp/12mp HR CCD4 chip was for S2 , when it's for a smaller. 602
type,cam and then made comparisons seemingly based on that premise
and the current S2 sized chip..... I think...

Click to expand...

MikeBee said:

I'll just get to taking pics whilst you guys chew over numbers and
sensor configurations!

Click to expand...

MikeBee said:

Mike Bee

--
abstracts:- http://homepage.mac.com/thesentinel/PhotoAlbum4.html
Live Band pics http://homepage.mac.com/thesentinel/PhotoAlbum5.html
Water pics http://homepage.mac.com/thesentinel/PhotoAlbum6.html

Click to expand...