Hmmm, 12 MP but in different sizes. Consider the Nikon D2X(s) vs Canon 1D mkII or 5D. http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_rev00.html http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_rev06.html#top_page
Results may vary, of course. Bob G -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 7:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: film and scanning vs digital photography Let's say you have two sensors, each 12 MP. One is FF the other smaller using 1.3X factor. To get the same multiplication factor with the FF, you have crop about 1/4th of the area out, which means you have reduced the resolution by that much. If the FF is about 1/4th higher res to the smaller sensor, then you are correct, no disadvantage. Considering cost and weight of a FF, may not be as great an advantage as it first appears. Art gary wrote: >I simply see no advantage to have a smaller sensor. I don't see how I >spent pixels. This makes no sense to me. > >Nikon has an option on some models where you can toss the outer area of >the sensor to save space on the memory card. > >R. Jackson wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
