 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / May 2008Is 12 megapixels "it" for the 1.5 sensor?
Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the reason the Pentax CMOS is apparently having problems, wouldn't you expect even more of it in the Olympus NMOS sensors since the pixel density is even higher? Likely, the sensor production run or design is flawed in some way, causing these issues. > Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel > 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the > reason the Pentax CMOS is apparently having problems, wouldn't you > expect even more of it in the Olympus NMOS sensors since the pixel > density is even higher? Likely, the sensor production run or design > is flawed in some way, causing these issues. No. 24mp APS-c is still less than half the pixel density of current P&S cameras. The Samsung sensor sucks because it's not very good, regardless of how it was over-hyped wrt the almost irrelevant "fill factor". They got that wrong - perhaps that's linked to the dead pixel thing you're reporting. > Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel > 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the > reason the Pentax CMOS is apparently having problems, wouldn't you > expect even more of it in the Olympus NMOS sensors since the pixel > density is even higher? Likely, the sensor production run or design > is flawed in some way, causing these issues. It is? You will have lots of links about this then? >> Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel >> 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >It is? You will have lots of links about this then? Oh, I'm sure he does. Expecting him to share his evidence and proof is asking a lot of Rander. After all, you can look them up yourself.... TR >>> Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel >>> 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > TR Why would he bother? His fun is posting one line "smart remarks". Did I just do that ? >>>> Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel >>>> 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Did I just do that ? Damn have you escaped again??? You never post "smart remarks" just "dumbass" ones. > > Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel > > 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > It is? You will have lots of links about this then? Check dpreview for a start >> > Reports of multiple dead/hot pixels with the Pentax K20D 15 megapixel >> > 1.5 crop sensor are appearing. But then if 15 on a 1.5 were the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Check dpreview for a start I did and I did not see much other than a lot of great pictures and rave revues being posted, which posts in particular were you meaning? > >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I did and I did not see much other than a lot of great pictures and rave > revues being posted, which posts in particular were you meaning? The 140 response one on hot pixels. I think it was the most- participated on post on the Pentax SLR group in the last week. None of this matters that much, unless the problem was progressive. You can do pixel mapping and eliminate the problem, with 15M you'd have to be mapping a huge number for it to be noticeable. My comment was more along the lines of the fact DSLRs don't do video for a reason, sensor heat and current draw/battery drain and yet they now do live view which some people might overuse, run too long. >> >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >The 140 response one on hot pixels. I think it was the most- >participated on post on the Pentax SLR group in the last week. I guess it's too much to ask you to provide links to some messages you thought were interesting or appropriate or supported your proposal? Or is your Copy/Paste thingy broken? > None >of this matters that much, unless the problem was progressive. You >can do pixel mapping and eliminate the problem, with 15M you'd have to >be mapping a huge number for it to be noticeable. This has got to be a first - Rander admits he's FOS! > My comment was more >along the lines of the fact DSLRs don't do video for a reason, sensor >heat and current draw/battery drain and yet they now do live view >which some people might overuse, run too long. No it wasn't. This is the first you've mentioned video. And arguing *this* point makes as much sense as moaning about the towing capacity of a Corvette. DSLRs don't *do* video for pretty much the same reason Corvettes don't *do* towing: it isn't designed for this sort of work. And while it is possible to modify a Corvette to tow a trailor and one day a DSLR may hit the market that also can be used to produce movie clips, neither will ever be the best tool for the job. >sensor >heat and current draw/battery drain and yet they now do live view >which some people might overuse, run too long. Those are all tertiary issues. The primary issue issue is focusing while in Live View. Shooting video pretty much requires autofocus, and DSLRs don't offer the Live View autofocusing speed necessary to shoot video. The secondary issue is the shutter: video cameras do not have a mechanical shutter. Image quality pretty much requires a mechanical shutter in a DSLR. TR >>> >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > TR It's allright, this was the one where everyone said WTF and that no one had seen it and of course anything like that gets sorted with pixel mapping so it is not likely to be an actual problem. After a week of asking someone actually posted a picture that might have qualified but thats about it, very widespread indeed........ >> >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > The 140 response one on hot pixels. I think it was the most- > participated on post on the Pentax SLR group in the last week. Most of the posts were along the lines of "what hot pixel problems?, it can't be that bad if nobody else is reporting it! " thread here http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=27852469 > >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > it! " > thread herehttp://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=2785... What are the odds that dpreview would get two cameras with the same problem so they couldn't properly review them? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.