Oly say 12MP Enough - Focus on Color Accuracy and Low Light

[rogprov]

"Customers who want more than 20 megapixels should look to full-frame cameras"

The area of an Olympus 4/3 sensor is very close to a quarter of the area of FF (35mm) sensor.
For their 4/3 sensor they are saying 12mp "is enough" so 48mp would be their idea of "enough" for a FF.
The a900 is only halfway there

Don't know if this interpretation is right or wrong - but that's how it appears to me.

[Dusty]

"Customers who want more than 20 megapixels should look to full-frame cameras"

The area of an Olympus 4/3 sensor is very close to a quarter of the area of FF (35mm) sensor.
For their 4/3 sensor they are saying 12mp "is enough" so 48mp would be their idea of "enough" for a FF.
The a900 is only halfway there

Don't know if this interpretation is right or wrong - but that's how it appears to me.

Of course you're going to limit your MPs to a lot lower on a 4/3 system. I applaud them for efforts to improve DR, high ISO and NR, and hope whatever they do to get those results spills over into everyone else's sensors and systems. However, saying 12MP is all anyone ever needs recalls a famous quote from someone who once said that "640K RAM is all anyone will ever need."

If for no other reason than to be 'on top', camera makers will keep pushing the MP wars until it becomes impossible to get better results by more MPs. Those who have higher MP cameras will realize that they can utilize the greater resolution for 'digital zoom', i.e., cropping, and there will always be the guys who need to shoot for billboards or other large formats. Devices such as the GigaPan will, of course, negate some of this high MP need, but that really only works for static scenes.

I'd like us all to take a look at this forum in 5 years and see where we are then!

Dusty

[Dusty]

Well, the 7D was 6.1 MP, 3 FPS, 3200 ISO max and $1600. For $1k, you can get the A700 with 12 MP, 5 FPS and 6400 ISO. Quite an improvement for $600 less! At this rate, a 24 MP 7 FPS, 12800 ISO camera will cost $400 in 5 years, assuming all improvements and cost reductions are linear, (which I don't).

Just because cameras don't follow the 'double the performance every 18 months' rule that processors do doesn't mean that thy haven't made real strides.

Dusty

[Dusty]

Don, YOU are the one always screaming for faster frame rates, now you're telling us most people don't care? Exactly which one of your multiple personalities am I addressing today?

I have no doubt you'll mega-post DXOLabs results all over to "prove" your point, no matter how much most of the forum members discount them, that's what you always do. I can see you're a firm believer in "If you can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$hit".

The fact of the matter is that most here see the positive direction of digital imaging , even if we aren't all happy with the speed at which it's happening.

Dusty

[Dusty]

I almost forgot that I was dealing with DUSTY the DISINGENUOUS (banned term). You, sir, really are a clueless moron. I am the biggest advocate of better high ISO IQ and low noise, not fast frame rates...I have made thousands of posts on high ISO and noise, and probably only a handful or two of posts mentioning frame rates.

So, Dusty, you see I want great HIGH ISO IQ, not massive frame rates you brainless dolt. If you were not born such a disingenuous (banned term) you may have turned out to be an ok guy. If I talk frame rates it's usually a calling for Sony to add HD VIDEO! Liars like yourself that start making personal attacks because they don't understand the facts should be banned from photoclubalpha. You don't have a clue about what is being talked about, but yet you insist on replying with lies, personal attacks, and megapixel marketing nonsense. You are the one that in the past said fast frame rates are extreme, I do believe, so please pull your head from your a$$ and then grab a hammer and start striking said head immediately.

The fact of the matter is most people are sick of the megapixel race...we have been sick of it for a few years now. We want better IQ....this is something that Sony is having a hard time delivering at mid and high ISOs. We also want live view on upper end cameras and Sony has failed to deliver. We also want HD VIDEO but Sony has failed to deliver. We also want lens fine tune on APS-C and Sony has failed to deliver. I could go on on but just because you are amazed by Sony's camera selection does not mean I am...Like I said, many held the 7D and 5D forever because the a700 is not a giant leap forward in IQ. Some are still holding them today.

5 years later the jpgs are worse, quick access user presets are gone, colors are arguably worse, raw files are choppy, high ISO is not much better, etc, etc...

This thread is about IQ , MP and Oly, not frame rates, and anyone that thinks it is about frame rates needs to get a clue.

BTW, I don't care how many forum members we have that are STONE STUPID, IGNORANT, or are DISINGENUOUS LIARS like yourself. To be honest, just one of your type is all we need around here, that's for sure.

If you ever wake up you will then realize that many folks world wide, including Popular Photography, Imaging-Resource, and almost every major camera manufacturer, review site, and camera tester on the planet uses DXO Analyzer and/or trusts DxO's numbers so nobody really gives a shitzki about what a couple brain dead forum fanboys think about something they cannot understand. Seriously.

-Sonolta

Wow! Where do I start? Besides the personal attacks - always the sign of either a weak argument or a weak intellect - When I searched the forums for your posts I came upon quite a few where you wanted faster frame rates and were not talking about video. You even tout the A700s advantage over the KM5D because of its' higher frame rates!

Yes, you are an advocate of higher ISO IQ, and even those of us who rarely use high ISO would like that feature available, albeit not at the expense of features we want.

You also seem to be the biggest basher of the brand you have chosen, and advocate of how superior other brands are, yet still you stick with Sony! In every field I have ever worked, if I needed a better tool, I bought it, regardless of brand loyalty. Somehow you refuse to do that. Perhaps you, like many of us, you value Sony's price/performance point in the DSLR market, and hope that your ranting will somehow force them to design just the camera YOU need, at a price much less than the high dollar ones you brag are so much better.

The reasons I choose Sony over the competition is because I couldn't get as much performance and features (my parameters, not anyone else's) in my budget from the other camera makers. That doesn't make me a fanboy, that makes me a smart shopper.

Yes, it's quite obvious that you care for no one else's opinion, unless it agrees with your own. That just makes you a less congenial human being, it doesn't make your opinions superior. While others may be either intimidated by your bluster or unwilling to any long point out your errors, I am not. Your personal inadequacies affect you posts, that's plain to see, but maybe some day you'll get over them and learn to behave in a civilized manner.

Dusty