SD1 Merrill hi res vs low res

I haven't noticed either stuck or 'patterned' white pixels, or even 'sporadic & stray' white pixels, except when using some special image analysis tools. I pixel-peep regularly too.

I still can't predict with 100% certainty when Merrill images will be crunch-free. Many full-res images are fine, and usually when every part of the entire frame has sufficient minimum lighting, it will turn out OK: but not always (and I'm nearly always shooting at the lowest ISO). When I can't risk it, I'll shoot low-res, and when I do, the CMOS binning works exactly as I want it to. I am still in awe when I pixel-peep old SD14 RAWs, and this Merrill method gets me as close as possible to that, but with modern conveniences and reliability.

I agree, the colour and lighting subtlety (sorry for using that word), and relative-accuracy, consistency/smoothness of Merrill Low-res files are really lovely, if you can live with the resolution limitations. I consider it my "SD14 Mark 2" when used this way, as it gives also me weather sealing and slightly better colour, and fewer sensor dust spots.

As Ted pointed out to me, the 'Medium' resolution handles weirdly (not confined to 1-dimensional interpolation), that while SPP manages it passably well, other RAW image processors must get pretty creative and funky with their interpretations (and I can't blame them). Now I just use Low or High (or both, if I have the luxury of opportunity). The 'Medium' setting is in every sense a compromise: you get higher resolution and some binning benefits, but at the price of some interpolation evidence too (though as we know, Foveons interpolate much better than others). IMHO, Medium-res basically restricts me to only use SPP and still might not give me what I wanted, so I now almost always use Merrill Low and/or 'Full/High' resolution.

"SD14 Mark 2" [SD1M in Low res]