They like to use mega-pixels because it sounds like the sensor is 40% bigger, only that is not how magnification works. In reality 40% bigger than 6mp is 12mp, and you have to go to 24mp to get twice the resolution. A 8.5 x 12 print from his camera and your 7x10.5 would be have the same resolution, but you would probably have to use RAW files to notice that. As you can see there is a lot of flim-flam involve in this kind of marketing.
Graywolf's rule: Don't spend your money until performance will double. Of course, if you want the features that the more costly item has, you pay your money and enjoy those features, but you will not notice much of a performance gain. --graywolf Walter Hamler wrote: > A friend just purchased a D200 so we did some comparo shots yesterday. Same > scene, fl, exposure, etc. His D200 and my istDL. He emailed me a couple > frames, 5.8 meg jpegs. I printed his and mine, 7 x 10.5 inches on photo > quality paper. He nor I can detect ANY difference in print quality. My > printer only goes that size max, but I really wonder how much difference > there might be on a 13 x19 for instance. > All this is in trying to determine if I really want a K10 or settle for a > K100 as a second body. I really want the image stabilization, and like the > benefit of having a second body that is identical to the DL in operation. My > thinking is that for the price of the K10 I can get a K100 body and an Epson > 1800 printer! (well, another 100.00 extra) > > Walt > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
