> From: steve harley <p...@paper-ape.com> > > on 2013-09-22 22:23 Tom C wrote >> Here's where I coming from on this. To say one's images wouldn't or >> couldn't benefit from increased resolution is like saying they >> couldn't benefit by using a finer grained film (in the day) or a >> higher quality lens. > > to me the point is not that there's no increase in resolution, the point is > not > to interpret the resolution numbers recklessly
I don't believe I was. I was pointing out that in film days one did whatever they could to eke out the highest quality image they could from the system. I routinely purchased $8/roll Velvia and Provia instead of department store consumer series film. There was far less testing and data available regarding benefits of resolution increase/grain decrease back then compared to now. Kodak threw a monkey-wrench in the mix by not publishing their film specifications using the same measurement techniques and scale as the other film producers. The only way to really achieve a big jump in resolution and dynamic range was to move to a larger size media. Many here have upgraded from 6MP (*ist series) to 10MP (K10D) to 14MP (K20D) to 14MP (K-7) to 16MP (K-5) to 16MP (K-5II). There were valid reasons to upgrade, besides the modest resolution increases, in most, if not all those cases. I had an *istD, K20D, and K-7. Since then I have a 20MP 1" sensor compact, a 24MP APS-C MILC, and a 36MP DSLR. If anything the resolution increase I've experienced by looking at other brands is significantly higher than if I had iterated through the Pentax offerings. I guess I don't know what you mean by reckless. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
