I think the answer is very simple. If you keep the Mpixels of a digital sensor constant, the larger the sensor the higher the quality of the image. Two reasons, 1. the individual pixels are larger, and thus lower noise. 2. The lenses are never infinite resolution so by making the image circle bigger ( for the bigger sensor ) more image information is resolved to be recorded too. Better recording and better image to be recorded. That's got to be better...How could a larger sensor NOT improve image quality. ( ignoring camera/ lens handling issues, etc. ) jco
-----Original Message----- From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 4:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Pentax lens test on DIGITAL? All Pentax DSLR same imagaing? First of all, Godfrey, this IS a digital versus film thread. Your thought experiment is a diversion. Dealing first with my assertion, common sense tells us that if we have to enlarge a negative/image more, it will look less sharp. So let's move on. Dealing with your scenario, which was: Let's assume that we have two cameras with digital sensors with 8Mpixel resolution, one sized to 16x24mm and one sized to 24x36mm. Further, let's assume that that we have a 35mm lens and a 50mm lens which demonstrate exactly equal performance. Fit the 24x36mm camera with a 50mm lens, fit the 16x24mm camera with the 35mm lens. Then take a photograph of the same subject with each of the two cameras, framed and exposed identically, to RAW format files. Process them for identical tonal rendering. Do not apply any sharpening. Print them to 10x15 inch image area on 11x17" paper. Which one will look sharper and why? My answer: If we assume that the limiting factor is lens resolution (which it usually is in my experience) then the print from the 50mm lens will be sharper. It will need to be enlarged less. However, my experience does not include 24x36 sensors. A sensor of this size with only 8Mpixels will perhaps itself be the limiting factor, and therefore there might not be much or any difference. However, I should be most interested to hear both your theories and of your practical experience. John On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 01:10:25 -0000, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I said nothing about 35mm film in my thought experiment, John. > Although > I disagree with you there too, from personal experience making 10x15 and > larger prints from both 35mm film and 6-8Mpixel digital captures. But > I'll leave that for another digital vs film thread. > > I said two cameras, one with a 8Mpixel sensor of 24x36mm dimension and > one with 8Mpixel sensor of 16x24mm dimension. Sensors equal digital > cameras, not film. > > Godfrey > > On Jan 9, 2006, at 4:44 PM, John Forbes wrote: > >> Godfrey, >> >> All else being equal, the 35mm will look sharper. Assuming both >> media >> are able to do justice to each lens, and that each lens is able to >> resolve N lpmm, and that the 35mm lens will fill the frame as much as >> the 50mm (it's too late for me to work that out), the 35mm image will >> need less enlargement. >> >> John >> >> --Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ >> > > > > > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
