I made this suggestion a couple of hours ago, but there's been no response to it. That can mean two things. One is that the post never got to the people who matter. The second is that while incorrect guesses can be easily dismissed, something very close to the mark can't safely be touched due to the embargo.
Here's my earlier unanswered post: --------------------------------------------------------------------- Having no time to audit the "Holy Crap" thread, to eliminate what Aaron has negatoried and reconsider his ambiguous answers, I'm going to have a stab. Why not? It's fun and after all it was Aaron who opened up Pandora's Box, what does he expect of us inquisitive types who don't work in retail and have insider knowledge? I've no background in electronics to understand what the patent documents say, but I do know that a big gripe about digital capture is that the exposure is recorded lineally, ie the brightest stop gets half the bit depth, the second brightest stop gets the next quarter of all the bit depth, etc. Eventually, the darkest discernible stop only has two or three levels in it. Perhaps Pentax has implemented logarithmic exposure (logE as film is measured) rather than linear exposure. Just a guess, and just for fun ;-) Regards, Anthony Farr > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lie > Arne > Sent: Thursday, 17 August 2006 12:15 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: RE: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body > > OK. Other limiting factor of digital is the linear CCD sensor, it is not > non-linear as film. The latter is a benefit in avoiding burn-outs and > loosing details in shadows. So, they (Pentax) are able to make the > characteristcs of the CCD approaching more that of film when it comes to > sensitivity. ??? > > Arne > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
