Is Olympus Stylus 1/1s the best compromise ever?

elliottnewcomb said:

I encourage anyone and everyone to try manual focus. If I can do it, you can do it.

Todays LCDs are darn good, and modern features, focus magnification, focus peaking, let you see very nicely. Tilt lcds reducing glare help also

Sony's magnification toggles between 8.6x and 17.2x, superb, and you can chose a focus peaking color and strength, it is dead on every time.

Click to expand...

Yes, for macro and portrait work focus is important, and autofocus is usually just an approximation. Reminds me of this Viola music notation.


from fiddleheads.ca viola joke collection

With a full-frame camera, manual focus would necessary much of the time, but with small sensors, it's OK for autofocus to be off a bit.

Back in the film days with matte screen and snap-to focus indicators, it was easy to manual focus. My trials of focus peaking found it to be very imprecise. Possibly magnification works well? At my age I would need reading glasses, but it might work for young people.

elliottnewcomb said:

I picked the end of Stylus 1 optical for 300mm, to find out how bright the f900 lens was at that matching #. If it is f5.3 at the end of it's zoom, 500mm, how could it be f6.1? I thought it might be no smaller than f4.9 at that point.

Click to expand...

It depends on lens design, but aperture vs focal length isn't always a monotonic function. The lens design used in compact travel zooms probably require using some interesting tradeoffs.

Typically vendors specify aperture values at the wide and telephoto limits. And the F900 exhibits some unusual behavior not disclosed by the basic specs. I remember seeing this in a review several months ago.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3831136

elliottnewcomb said:

?? Does anyone know a source for these aperture curves of cameras/lenses. ??

Click to expand...

Other than the equivalent aperture charts for popular models, mostly from owners with an above average level of curiosity.

Enders Shadow said:

elliottnewcomb said:

I picked the end of Stylus 1 optical for 300mm, to find out how bright the f900 lens was at that matching #. If it is f5.3 at the end of it's zoom, 500mm, how could it be f6.1? I thought it might be no smaller than f4.9 at that point.

Click to expand...

It depends on lens design, but aperture vs focal length isn't always a monotonic function. The lens design used in compact travel zooms probably require using some interesting tradeoffs.

Typically vendors specify aperture values at the wide and telephoto limits. And the F900 exhibits some unusual behavior not disclosed by the basic specs. I remember seeing this in a review several months ago.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3831136

Enders Shadow said:

?? Does anyone know a source for these aperture curves of cameras/lenses. ??

Click to expand...

Other than the equivalent aperture charts for popular models, mostly from owners with an above average level of curiosity.

Click to expand...

Holy moly, who would think a lens would narrow more in the middle than in the end of it's max zoom. I am always thankful to learn here on the forums.

Here's the chart that shows F900 at f6,1 at 300mm, and then open to f5.3 at 500mm. Again, f900 is a good camera, it was only chosen because it was mentioned.





Sorry to be a bit off topic, but I find it educational as well as surprising.

--
Elliott

Hi Greynerd,

I am sorry to say that in this instance the assumptions you make are wrong.

First you are looking at discontinued 2011 12 MP sensors . The 16MP sensor was a massive leap in performance .



Compare this to the XZ/stylus series, the change from CCD to CMOS made a big difference but after that there is no growth , this is a similar result with most manufacturers.



with APSC sensors the changes are more extreme the basic Nikon models like the 3300 are upto 24MP resolution with scores in the mid 80's .Of no consequence except you can buy one of these with lenses the same focal length of the Stylus 1 for the the same price or less.

As for your assumption that small sensors will improve they will not, because the vast majority of photography enthusiasts are voting for other formats with their wallets.

Olympus knows this very well

here are a couple of snippets from their yearly financials , it is open knowledge that for olympus the compact market is finished with tiny incremental changes to existing models , most probably the 5 axis IS to the Stylus 1 s ??. It is the path they have taken with the SH series and the system is already licensed out to Casio with the EX100

http://www.casio-intl.com/asia-mea/en/dc/ex_100/

A company does not reduce inventory of a camera segment by 90% if they see a future in it

elliottnewcomb said:

Enders Shadow said:

elliottnewcomb said:

I picked the end of Stylus 1 optical for 300mm, to find out how bright the f900 lens was at that matching #. If it is f5.3 at the end of it's zoom, 500mm, how could it be f6.1? I thought it might be no smaller than f4.9 at that point.

Click to expand...

It depends on lens design, but aperture vs focal length isn't always a monotonic function. The lens design used in compact travel zooms probably require using some interesting tradeoffs.

Typically vendors specify aperture values at the wide and telephoto limits. And the F900 exhibits some unusual behavior not disclosed by the basic specs. I remember seeing this in a review several months ago.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3831136

elliottnewcomb said:

?? Does anyone know a source for these aperture curves of cameras/lenses. ??

Click to expand...

Other than the equivalent aperture charts for popular models, mostly from owners with an above average level of curiosity.

Click to expand...

Holy moly, who would think a lens would narrow more in the middle than in the end of it's max zoom. I am always thankful to learn here on the forums.

Here's the chart that shows F900 at f6,1 at 300mm, and then open to f5.3 at 500mm. Again, f900 is a good camera, it was only chosen because it was mentioned.



Sorry to be a bit off topic, but I find it educational as well as surprising.

--
Elliott

Click to expand...

Surprising to me as well.

I will look at the aperture now as I zoom.

The Nokia Lumia 40mp sensor achieves remarkable results for a slightly larger than 1/1.7" so the quality can be achieved in smaller sensors. The camera makers have just lost the battle, desire or resources to develop these small sensors.

The big problem the camera manufacturers are having is possibly that they are having to resort to large sensors to keep up with phone quality which is probably where all the development money is.

This formulaic big sensor = big quality is nonsense.

Edit: I am just saying this in case somebody thinks that if they buy an old pre-Sony m43 sensor secondhand to replace their compact and think that they will get x stops improvement over their compact based on relative sensor dimensions they will get a nasty surprise. My Samsung EX2f was very much a match for the epm-1 which was why I dumped m43 and came back when the em5 was affordable. These numbers games are useful but not definitive.

Aaron Sur said:

Hi Greynerd,

I am sorry to say that in this instance the assumptions you make are wrong.

First you are looking at discontinued 2011 12 MP sensors . The 16MP sensor was a massive leap in performance .



Compare this to the XZ/stylus series, the change from CCD to CMOS made a big difference but after that there is no growth , this is a similar result with most manufacturers.



with APSC sensors the changes are more extreme the basic Nikon models like the 3300 are upto 24MP resolution with scores in the mid 80's .Of no consequence except you can buy one of these with lenses the same focal length of the Stylus 1 for the the same price or less.

As for your assumption that small sensors will improve they will not, because the vast majority of photography enthusiasts are voting for other formats with their wallets.

Olympus knows this very well

here are a couple of snippets from their yearly financials , it is open knowledge that for olympus the compact market is finished with tiny incremental changes to existing models , most probably the 5 axis IS to the Stylus 1 s ??. It is the path they have taken with the SH series and the system is already licensed out to Casio with the EX100

http://www.casio-intl.com/asia-mea/en/dc/ex_100/

A company does not reduce inventory of a camera segment by 90% if they see a future in it

Click to expand...

CAcreeks said:

elliottnewcomb said:

I encourage anyone and everyone to try manual focus. If I can do it, you can do it.

Todays LCDs are darn good, and modern features, focus magnification, focus peaking, let you see very nicely. Tilt lcds reducing glare help also

Sony's magnification toggles between 8.6x and 17.2x, superb, and you can chose a focus peaking color and strength, it is dead on every time.

Click to expand...

Yes, for macro and portrait work focus is important, and autofocus is usually just an approximation. Reminds me of this Viola music notation.


from fiddleheads.ca viola joke collection

With a full-frame camera, manual focus would necessary much of the time, but with small sensors, it's OK for autofocus to be off a bit.

Back in the film days with matte screen and snap-to focus indicators, it was easy to manual focus. My trials of focus peaking found it to be very imprecise. Possibly magnification works well? At my age I would need reading glasses, but it might work for young people.

Click to expand...

the mf implementation of 1(s) + vf is superb, easy to use, precise and a pleasure to utilize. With camera planted to face one can flip the mf lever without fumbling around and smoothly twist the adjustment ring watching an area of the image come in and out of focus



wj

For me, yes - as a travel camera.

All cameras are a compromise. On my last overseas trip I wished I had my Nikon 300mm f/4 for the birds, but I am really pleased with all of the various types of photos I did get with my Stylus 1. Macro, landscape, wildlife, street, a few videos, social type photos etc.

I like to travel with a small bag (man purse) that is just big enough for my Stylus 1, iPhone, sunglasses, passport, tickets etc. I used to take a Canon s90/100 in my pocket, but with the iPhone 6, I leave it at home if I have the Stylus 1

I tried the mirrorless thing, but by the time I include a couple of lenses in my bag I might as well take my DSLR. Not to mention the fact that I have been collecting Nikon lenses, cameras and accessories for the last 40 plus years and I am too old to start over...

The discussions about IQ as good as "X" are meaningless to me because I accept that it is basically a point and shoot with maybe just about a little above average IQ for the genre. It is good enough for me and my purposes.

I know it is a frowned upon on these forums as a gimmick, but I use the 2x digital zoom button quite a lot especially for wildlife. A quick and easy way to to get a wildlife crop for Facebook, online forums, etc. You still have the raw uncropped file if you desire to do a better crop in Photoshop, but I seldom do,since I almost never print anything. And you can quickly send to iPhone for emailing, Facebook, etc

Another thing I thought was a "gimmick" was the lens cover, but after traveling with this feature, I think it is genius.

I wear coke bottle glasses and this is the only camera of this type that I can actually use the manual focus and it is so easy to access with the front switch.

Speaking of easy access, you have all of the controls of a DSLR without going into menus.

I had sticker shock at the the original price, but I waited and bought a refurb from the Oly site for a little less than $400.00 and I think the one I received was brand new.

Another intangible is that it is just a lot of fun-almost as much fun as the best digital camera I have ever owned, the Oly Uzi

Stop here, don't want fanboy label.

WDEnATL said:

I know it is a frowned upon on these forums as a gimmick, but I use the 2x digital zoom button quite a lot especially for wildlife. A quick and easy way to to get a wildlife crop for Facebook, online forums, etc. You still have the raw uncropped file if you desire to do a better crop in Photoshop, but I seldom do,since I almost never print anything. And you can quickly send to iPhone for emailing, Facebook, etc

Click to expand...

I hope you will say something about your 2X use in this thread



Elliott

elliottnewcomb said:

WDEnATL said:

I know it is a frowned upon on these forums as a gimmick, but I use the 2x digital zoom button quite a lot especially for wildlife. A quick and easy way to to get a wildlife crop for Facebook, online forums, etc. You still have the raw uncropped file if you desire to do a better crop in Photoshop, but I seldom do,since I almost never print anything. And you can quickly send to iPhone for emailing, Facebook, etc

Click to expand...

I hope you will say something about your 2X use in this thread

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3902781

Elliott

Click to expand...

I also use the 2x converter on my Stylus 1. I think it might be good to stop down the lens and use a fast shutter speed when using 2x but I've not tested it yet.

Member said:

The Nokia Lumia 40mp sensor achieves remarkable results for a slightly larger than 1/1.7" so the quality can be achieved in smaller sensors

Click to expand...

Remarkable ?where? An exotic experiment where 40 MP was stirred around to create a 5 MP image , forget about the initial price . It does not matter anyway the company in question has laid off most it's staff , sold off it's manufacturing and tooling and is now owned by Microsoft.

It's pretty good compared to my ancient XZ-1



As for nasty surprises yes it will be a shock to the system if you purchase a $99 obsolete camera and expect it to outperform a $600 premium compact



I completely agree that my Nikon D70 APSC SLR was inferior to the Stylus 1 . Problem is I purchased it over a decade ago and sold it about the same time the EPM-1 came out 5 years ago . Utterly totally irrelevant.

I don't own a M4/3rds system .If you have a EM-5 and a spare 600 bucks do yourself a favor and get the new 14-150 lens instead of a Stylus 1.

Just check out Jacques post below he is/was a ardent stylus 1 supporter

Aaron Sur said:

Aaron Sur said:

The Nokia Lumia 40mp sensor achieves remarkable results for a slightly larger than 1/1.7" so the quality can be achieved in smaller sensors

Click to expand...

Remarkable ?where? An exotic experiment where 40 MP was stirred around to create a 5 MP image , forget about the initial price . It does not matter anyway the company in question has laid off most it's staff , sold off it's manufacturing and tooling and is now owned by Microsoft.

It's pretty good compared to my ancient XZ-1



As for nasty surprises yes it will be a shock to the system if you purchase a $99 obsolete camera and expect it to outperform a $600 premium compact



I completely agree that my Nikon D70 APSC SLR was inferior to the Stylus 1 . Problem is I purchased it over a decade ago and sold it about the same time the EPM-1 came out 5 years ago . Utterly totally irrelevant.

I don't own a M4/3rds system .If you have a EM-5 and a spare 600 bucks do yourself a favor and get the new 14-150 lens instead of a Stylus 1.

Just check out Jacques post below he is/was a ardent stylus 1 supporter

Click to expand...

There's a rule in philosophical discussions, the first one to reference Hitler, loses the argument. I apply a similar rule to DxOMark scoring. If you use DxOMark scoring to prove a point, you've already lost.

Yes indeed, the E-PM1 will easily best a Stylus 1 in image quality. In fact, I'll stake my claim that the even older E-PL1 will easily trounce the Stylus 1. I've shot the E-PL1 (fantastic sensor) against my XZ-2 (same as Stylus 1) and there is literally no comparison.

You're just blowing bubbles.

Kerusker said:

Since this thread offers some inaccuracies and some kind of wishful thinking/seeing, I just want to repeat some facts regarding sensor formats which have been discussed elsewhere:

Stylus 1 has crop factor 4.7 and m4/3 has 2.0 to FF.

Stylus 1 has crop factor 4.7/2.0 = 2.35 to m4/3 (square of 2.35 is 5.5)

If ISO is defined in the same way i.e. the sensors have the same sensitivity (photons per square mm), then

ISO 100 on Stylus 1 corresponds to ISO 550 on m4/3 ie. these shots look the same regarding noise etc. in other words, you can achieve better photos on m4/3 because you have ISO 400, 200 and 100 for better quality.

Now regarding aperture: You have to compare real aperture diameter:

For a lens with 150mm equ. focal length, the Stylus 1 has a diameter of 11.4mm at f/2.8 (f=32mm) whereas the m4/3 cam has f/6.6 for this aperture diameter (at f=75mm). Again you get f/5.6, f/4 if available on the m4/3 lens, which is not available on the Stylus 1!

I like the Stylus 1 a lot. It's currently my most used cam because it's with me whenever possible.

Nevertheless, it has it's limitations. There are some people which can get around these limitations very well.

Enjoy

--
][.Kerusker
we don't see that we don't see (eye's blind spot)

Click to expand...

Wishful thinking? That's putting it mildly. More like dreaming.

Sure, the Stylus 1 is a nice camera but comparing it to M43 or APS-C as I've read here on this thread is absolutely ludicrous. No way Jose. Even the "ancient" 12MP M43 sensor is light years ahead of the 1/1.7" sensor, even with the Stylus 1 "fast" (I'm laughing just a little) zoom lens.

I did my own test shots using the XZ-2 which has the identical sensor and possibly sharper lens and it just doesn't stack up as many claim.


E-PL1 on the left and XZ-2 on the right, both at F/5.6 and ISO 400 (E-Pl1 with kit lens)

Wake up people, please. No one is really biting on the worm you're dangling. The Stylus 1 is passe'.

Peter Mathews said:

Kerusker said:

Since this thread offers some inaccuracies and some kind of wishful thinking/seeing, I just want to repeat some facts regarding sensor formats which have been discussed elsewhere:

Stylus 1 has crop factor 4.7 and m4/3 has 2.0 to FF.

Stylus 1 has crop factor 4.7/2.0 = 2.35 to m4/3 (square of 2.35 is 5.5)

If ISO is defined in the same way i.e. the sensors have the same sensitivity (photons per square mm), then

ISO 100 on Stylus 1 corresponds to ISO 550 on m4/3 ie. these shots look the same regarding noise etc. in other words, you can achieve better photos on m4/3 because you have ISO 400, 200 and 100 for better quality.

Now regarding aperture: You have to compare real aperture diameter:

For a lens with 150mm equ. focal length, the Stylus 1 has a diameter of 11.4mm at f/2.8 (f=32mm) whereas the m4/3 cam has f/6.6 for this aperture diameter (at f=75mm). Again you get f/5.6, f/4 if available on the m4/3 lens, which is not available on the Stylus 1!

I like the Stylus 1 a lot. It's currently my most used cam because it's with me whenever possible.

Nevertheless, it has it's limitations. There are some people which can get around these limitations very well.

Enjoy

--
][.Kerusker
we don't see that we don't see (eye's blind spot)

Click to expand...

Wishful thinking? That's putting it mildly. More like dreaming.

Sure, the Stylus 1 is a nice camera but comparing it to M43 or APS-C as I've read here on this thread is absolutely ludicrous. No way Jose. Even the "ancient" 12MP M43 sensor is light years ahead of the 1/1.7" sensor, even with the Stylus 1 "fast" (I'm laughing just a little) zoom lens.

I did my own test shots using the XZ-2 which has the identical sensor and possibly sharper lens and it just doesn't stack up as many claim.


E-PL1 on the left and XZ-2 on the right, both at F/5.6 and ISO 400 (E-Pl1 with kit lens)

Wake up people, please. No one is really biting on the worm you're dangling. The Stylus 1 is passe'.

Click to expand...

You've done similar experiments to me. Except I compared the XZ-2 at 400 ISO and f/2.8 with a GM1 at ISO 1600 and f/5.6. Same shutter speed.

The IQ results were in the GM1 favour. The dof was greater with the XZ2.

When it comes to compromise. The Stylus 1 has a viewfinder and still fits in a jacket pocket. All m43 cameras have lenses that stick out.

ludwik123 said:

Peter Mathews said:

Kerusker said:

Since this thread offers some inaccuracies and some kind of wishful thinking/seeing, I just want to repeat some facts regarding sensor formats which have been discussed elsewhere:

Stylus 1 has crop factor 4.7 and m4/3 has 2.0 to FF.

Stylus 1 has crop factor 4.7/2.0 = 2.35 to m4/3 (square of 2.35 is 5.5)

If ISO is defined in the same way i.e. the sensors have the same sensitivity (photons per square mm), then

ISO 100 on Stylus 1 corresponds to ISO 550 on m4/3 ie. these shots look the same regarding noise etc. in other words, you can achieve better photos on m4/3 because you have ISO 400, 200 and 100 for better quality.

Now regarding aperture: You have to compare real aperture diameter:

For a lens with 150mm equ. focal length, the Stylus 1 has a diameter of 11.4mm at f/2.8 (f=32mm) whereas the m4/3 cam has f/6.6 for this aperture diameter (at f=75mm). Again you get f/5.6, f/4 if available on the m4/3 lens, which is not available on the Stylus 1!

I like the Stylus 1 a lot. It's currently my most used cam because it's with me whenever possible.

Nevertheless, it has it's limitations. There are some people which can get around these limitations very well.

Enjoy

--
][.Kerusker
we don't see that we don't see (eye's blind spot)

Click to expand...

Wishful thinking? That's putting it mildly. More like dreaming.

Sure, the Stylus 1 is a nice camera but comparing it to M43 or APS-C as I've read here on this thread is absolutely ludicrous. No way Jose. Even the "ancient" 12MP M43 sensor is light years ahead of the 1/1.7" sensor, even with the Stylus 1 "fast" (I'm laughing just a little) zoom lens.

I did my own test shots using the XZ-2 which has the identical sensor and possibly sharper lens and it just doesn't stack up as many claim.


E-PL1 on the left and XZ-2 on the right, both at F/5.6 and ISO 400 (E-Pl1 with kit lens)

Wake up people, please. No one is really biting on the worm you're dangling. The Stylus 1 is passe'.

Click to expand...

You've done similar experiments to me. Except I compared the XZ-2 at 400 ISO and f/2.8 with a GM1 at ISO 1600 and f/5.6. Same shutter speed.

The IQ results were in the GM1 favour. The dof was greater with the XZ2.

When it comes to compromise. The Stylus 1 has a viewfinder and still fits in a jacket pocket. All m43 cameras have lenses that stick out.

Click to expand...

True. The Stylus 1 does appear to have the most features packed into the smallest body. Can you name any cameras that could compare?

Peter Mathews said:

True. The Stylus 1 does appear to have the most features packed into the smallest body. Can you name any cameras that could compare?

Click to expand...

The Panasonic FZ300 (25-600mm, constant f/2.8) is closest, though there may be others. The FZ300 has 4K video and is weather sealed among other features. But.... it's bigger and heavier and the sensor is smaller, so you'd have to contend with that. In terms of IQ the FZ300 is unproven as it was just released.

John McCormack said:

Peter Mathews said:

True. The Stylus 1 does appear to have the most features packed into the smallest body. Can you name any cameras that could compare?

Click to expand...

The Panasonic FZ300 (25-600mm, constant f/2.8) is closest, though there may be others. The FZ300 has 4K video and is weather sealed among other features. But.... it's bigger and heavier and the sensor is smaller, so you'd have to contend with that. In terms of IQ the FZ300 is unproven as it was just released.

Click to expand...

How 'bout the Nikon P7800?

John McCormack said:

Peter Mathews said:

True. The Stylus 1 does appear to have the most features packed into the smallest body. Can you name any cameras that could compare?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

And that my friend, is why I think it is an important camera. When I bought mine, NO ONE else had that combo with 1/1.7" sensor that fits a jacket pocket or small belt/shoulder case. There are tons of superzooms, but they do not have a constant bright lens. If you want a constant bright lens, with more range, it has to be bigger, like the FZ300 mentioned below.

Ease of portability increases likelyhood and frequency of use, minimizing missed shots. Frequent use improves skills.

The question is about P&S compromise, P&S means fixed lens. It means, non-money shots, it means memory shots, it means, 'good enough'. It means Amateur Enthusiast, improving skills, composition, knowledge. Otherwise, you would use something better. Better is bigger.

As for cost, related to camera and sensor size: It's the constant f2.8 that is worth the price. I had the Sony RX10, type 1 sensor (it ain't 1"), constant f2.8 24-200mm optical, 2X to 400mm. $1,300. The lens alone was worth $1,300. Awesome IQ, but, TOO BIG, it stayed home, as would any medium size SLR kit. I sold it, and was thrilled to find and buy Stylus 1. I can get better IQ from my Sony rx100 type 1 sensor, but, most of the time, visible on lcd or 8x10? Does it matter?

John McCormack said:

The Panasonic FZ300 (25-600mm, constant f/2.8) is closest, though there may be others. The FZ300 has 4K video and is weather sealed among other features. But.... it's bigger and heavier and the sensor is smaller, so you'd have to contend with that. In terms of IQ the FZ300 is unproven as it was just released.

Click to expand...

So then it takes it back to the question, do any cameras, with decent amount of range, with a 1/2.3" sensor, fitting a jacket pocket, equal Stylus 1 1/1.7" IQ, at viewable sizes, at no more than 8x10 prints?

I suspect, Jpeg, superfine, 1/1.7" allows a heavier crop than 1/2.3". RAW too. I many times look for alternate crops of photos, or, like my recent batch of continuous shooting of a soccer game, quite heavy crops. Great shots, no, great memories of the sequence of action, yes. Better if I got out of my midfield chair, and started closer, yes.

Stylus 1 AF is fast and accurate, continuous is fast, and separate metering and focus for each shot, handheld IS darn good, that's terrific.

As for 600mm, how often do you use that range, and is it likely to be a planned shoot, like birding, or a trip to a city looking for detail shots of buildings? If so, Stylus 1 2X (see separate thread) gets you 'good enough' 600mm. The 1.7X tele gets Stylus 1 to f2.8 510mm optical if you prefer, (how much is f2.8 28-510mm optical lens worth?) with the great advantage of having 300mm in your jacket pocket most of the time. If you shoot 600mm a lot, wouldn't you use real optical 600mm, and bigger sensor, with superior results?

The threads, putting the weight on the body, filters, conversion lenses, makes it a camera system.

--
Elliott

Here are a few with 2x Digital Converter. Some are stopped down a bit.

No chance of a double truck in Nat Geo, but fun for me

thanks

And all these problems with selling Windows mobile are because of the camera? A most amusing reply. I think the absence of major applications is the problem. I cannot wait to get rid of the phone but the camera is the best thing about it. Tremendously slow but worth keeping just as a camera.

Aaron Sur said:

Aaron Sur said:

The Nokia Lumia 40mp sensor achieves remarkable results for a slightly larger than 1/1.7" so the quality can be achieved in smaller sensors

Click to expand...

Remarkable ?where? An exotic experiment where 40 MP was stirred around to create a 5 MP image , forget about the initial price . It does not matter anyway the company in question has laid off most it's staff , sold off it's manufacturing and tooling and is now owned by Microsoft.

Click to expand...