A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

40 vs 16MP



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old February 17th 15, 07:56 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default 40 vs 16MP

In article , nospam wrote:

In article , philo


philo:
That said...the 40MP camera did a great job.

nospam:
only with still subjects.


don't expect much if the subject is moving.


philo:
Why is that?


because it takes multiple exposures, shifting the sensor slightly
for each one, and then combining the images for the final result.


that should work ok for still subjects but not so well for moving
ones.


Yeah, they're hoping to improve that going forward:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/547...-kataoka-from-
olympus-om-d-high-resolution-mode

However, "hand held" and "moving subject" isn't the same thing, so not sure if it
is going to help with that.

--
Sandman
  #62  
Old February 17th 15, 10:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 40 vs 16MP

On 2/16/2015 5:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2015-02-16 16:37:42 +0000, philo said:

On 02/16/2015 10:24 AM, nospam wrote:

In article , philo

wrote:


That said...the 40MP camera did a great job.


only with still subjects.


don't expect much if the subject is moving.


Why is that?


because it takes multiple exposures, shifting the sensor slightly for

each one, and then combining the images for the final result.


that should work ok for still subjects but not so well for moving ones.


Thanks for the info...


if that's the case the camera would not do me much good

as I usually shoot moving subjects...as a matter of fact I'm usually
moving as I shoot.


Damn! It's a good thing that my antique D300S does reasonably well with
moving subjects with only 12MP. ;-)

http://adobe.ly/1CBUnZ6


One of your better plane images/

I am trying to figure out whay your postings appear in a much larger
typeface than other postingds.

This has only recently started. Did you change someting at your end, or
is it at my end.




--
PeterN
  #63  
Old February 17th 15, 10:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 40 vs 16MP

On 2/16/2015 7:40 PM, philo wrote:
On 02/16/2015 05:43 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 2/16/2015 5:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2015-02-16 16:37:42 +0000, philo said:

On 02/16/2015 10:24 AM, nospam wrote:

In article , philo

wrote:


That said...the 40MP camera did a great job.


only with still subjects.


don't expect much if the subject is moving.


Why is that?


because it takes multiple exposures, shifting the sensor slightly for

each one, and then combining the images for the final result.


that should work ok for still subjects but not so well for moving ones.


Thanks for the info...


if that's the case the camera would not do me much good

as I usually shoot moving subjects...as a matter of fact I'm usually
moving as I shoot.


Damn! It's a good thing that my antique D300S does reasonably well with
moving subjects with only 12MP. ;-)

http://adobe.ly/1CBUnZ6

http://adobe.ly/1zJ4SaT


--

Regards,


Savageduck


Web page unavailable. ;-(

I will try agai when I get to another access point.





Works fine for me

Thanks,
It works now. May have been an access point issue. When I visit certain
locations I run into that issue. Plus I had to do a system cleanup on my
laptop.


--
PeterN
  #64  
Old February 17th 15, 11:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 40 vs 16MP

On 2015-02-17 22:37:15 +0000, PeterN said:

On 2/16/2015 5:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:


Le Snip

Damn! It's a good thing that my antique D300S does reasonably well with
moving subjects with only 12MP. ;-)

http://adobe.ly/1CBUnZ6


One of your better plane images/


Thanks.
I believe I have a few shots of that P-38L which might be better. That
said, here is a P-51D which might apeal to your tastes. The odd
coloration on the fuselage is a reflection of the ground due to the
highly polished aluminum.
http://adobe.ly/1Dnv5Dc

I am trying to figure out whay your postings appear in a much larger
typeface than other postingds.


Larger? Just how much larger are you seeing?

I haven't done anything at this end. You are using Thunderbird, and
that should dictate both font & size of type you read in any messages.
That is true for me, I only read messages at the size & font set in my
preferences, not the size & font used by a poster.

This has only recently started. Did you change someting at your end, or
is it at my end.


As I said I haven't done anything other than get my Mac back up and
running with a new HDD after the crash I suffered a couple of weeks
ago. You might recall that I had to use my iPad + Newstap for a while.
Naturally I have had to reinstall a bunch of stuff from backup.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon D4 16MP as good as D3s in low light? Rich[_6_] Digital SLR Cameras 0 January 6th 12 03:59 AM
4mp doubled = 16mp!? Bolshoy Huy Digital Photography 21 March 22nd 06 12:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.