On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Mark Roberts <[email protected]> wrote:
> Storage space, processing power. Also you can always get better noise > performance from larger sensor sites, given equivalent technology. > Some people prefer that over greater resolution. Gordon Moore, in his infinite kindness, provides us with both more pixels, and the tools to deal with them. :-) The "better noise perfomance" argument is less true with the Sony Exmor sensors than it used to be. Read noise--which is what you incur on a per-pixel basis--is very well controlled in these sensors. You could downsample in post, and get performance very close to a sensor designed at the downsampled size. It's hard to go the other way! And the 42MP sensor is back-side illuminated, so you'll be getting a big S/N gain there compared to previous sensors. The net result will probably be both higher pixel density and better noise characteristics than the K-5. And a bigger sensor, of course. Win-win-win! Also, a sensor with fewer pixels would be more prone to aliasing. That might mean a return of the AA filter. I guess my point is that everyone seems to love the K-5 and K-3 sensors. This is a bigger version of those, with the bonus of backside illumination. Be happy! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
