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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
Bruce wrote in
: [The D300 also offered excellent low noise performance that was (and still is) the best of any APS-C camera, although it has almost been matched by the new 16 MP sensor in the Nikon D7000, Pentax K-5 and Sony A55.] Huh? That is totally false. The D300 pixels have a read noise of about 1.0 12-bit ADU at base ISO; the K5 has about 0.9 *14-bit* ADU, about 22% as much read noise per pixel, slightly less per image with more pixels (19.4%), and the quantum efficiency is higher, too. There is nothing that compares to the Nikon D7000, the Pentax K-5, or the Sony A55, for APS-C DR, and only the FF D3X touches them, as far as DSLRs go (slightly higher noise floor, but slightly less photon shot noise). |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
Bruce wrote in
: John Sheehy wrote: Bruce wrote in m: [The D300 also offered excellent low noise performance that was (and still is) the best of any APS-C camera, although it has almost been matched by the new 16 MP sensor in the Nikon D7000, Pentax K-5 and Sony A55.] Huh? That is totally false. The D300 pixels have a read noise of about 1.0 12-bit ADU at base ISO; the K5 has about 0.9 *14-bit* ADU, about 22% as much read noise per pixel, slightly less per image with more pixels (19.4%), and the quantum efficiency is higher, too. There is nothing that compares to the Nikon D7000, the Pentax K-5, or the Sony A55, for APS-C DR, and only the FF D3X touches them, as far as DSLRs go (slightly higher noise floor, but slightly less photon shot noise). Do you ever take photographs, or do you just waffle on about pet theories and paper specifications? What difference would that make? What I said is completely true. People who ask if people take pictures when they make technical statements are morons, grasping at straws in a pathetic attempt to make people to stop writing or saying things that remind them of how little they know. I suppose you would prefer incorrect information? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
On 1/10/2011 7:14 AM, Bruce wrote:
John wrote: wrote Do you ever take photographs, or do you just waffle on about pet theories and paper specifications? What difference would that make? What I said is completely true. People who ask if people take pictures when they make technical statements are morons, grasping at straws in a pathetic attempt to make people to stop writing or saying things that remind them of how little they know. I suppose you would prefer incorrect information? I note you were unable to answer the simple question I asked. Perhaps we should set up a new newsgroup for people like you, something along the lines of "alt.measurbators". Note there is no mention of "photo" in that title. In the meantime, welcome to my kill file, and don't bother replying . Hey, take it easy on John. At least he's not talking about banding in the 5D II. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
On 1/9/2011 8:10 PM, John Sheehy wrote:
wrote in : John wrote: wrote in : [The D300 also offered excellent low noise performance that was (and still is) the best of any APS-C camera, although it has almost been matched by the new 16 MP sensor in the Nikon D7000, Pentax K-5 and Sony A55.] Huh? That is totally false. The D300 pixels have a read noise of about 1.0 12-bit ADU at base ISO; the K5 has about 0.9 *14-bit* ADU, about 22% as much read noise per pixel, slightly less per image with more pixels (19.4%), and the quantum efficiency is higher, too. There is nothing that compares to the Nikon D7000, the Pentax K-5, or the Sony A55, for APS-C DR, and only the FF D3X touches them, as far as DSLRs go (slightly higher noise floor, but slightly less photon shot noise). Do you ever take photographs, or do you just waffle on about pet theories and paper specifications? What difference would that make? What I said is completely true. People who ask if people take pictures when they make technical statements are morons, grasping at straws in a pathetic attempt to make people to stop writing or saying things that remind them of how little they know. I suppose you would prefer incorrect information? Careful. As soon as you call Brucie on anything, he claims to ignore what you say. -- Peter |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
On 1/10/2011 7:14 AM, Bruce wrote:
John wrote: wrote Do you ever take photographs, or do you just waffle on about pet theories and paper specifications? What difference would that make? What I said is completely true. People who ask if people take pictures when they make technical statements are morons, grasping at straws in a pathetic attempt to make people to stop writing or saying things that remind them of how little they know. I suppose you would prefer incorrect information? I note you were unable to answer the simple question I asked. Perhaps we should set up a new newsgroup for people like you, something along the lines of "alt.measurbators". Note there is no mention of "photo" in that title. In the meantime, welcome to my kill file, and don't bother replying . As predicted. -- Peter |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
"peter" wrote in message ... On 1/10/2011 7:14 AM, Bruce wrote: John wrote: wrote Do you ever take photographs, or do you just waffle on about pet theories and paper specifications? What difference would that make? What I said is completely true. People who ask if people take pictures when they make technical statements are morons, grasping at straws in a pathetic attempt to make people to stop writing or saying things that remind them of how little they know. I suppose you would prefer incorrect information? I note you were unable to answer the simple question I asked. Perhaps we should set up a new newsgroup for people like you, something along the lines of "alt.measurbators". Note there is no mention of "photo" in that title. In the meantime, welcome to my kill file, and don't bother replying . As predicted. -- Peter A pity - I have a lot of respect for John Sheehy's contributions. Cheers, David |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why did Fuji abandon the SuperCCD sensor?
On 1/18/2011 2:14 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
"peter" wrote in message ... On 1/10/2011 7:14 AM, Bruce wrote: John wrote: wrote Do you ever take photographs, or do you just waffle on about pet theories and paper specifications? What difference would that make? What I said is completely true. People who ask if people take pictures when they make technical statements are morons, grasping at straws in a pathetic attempt to make people to stop writing or saying things that remind them of how little they know. I suppose you would prefer incorrect information? I note you were unable to answer the simple question I asked. Perhaps we should set up a new newsgroup for people like you, something along the lines of "alt.measurbators". Note there is no mention of "photo" in that title. In the meantime, welcome to my kill file, and don't bother replying . As predicted. -- Peter A pity - I have a lot of respect for John Sheehy's contributions. So do I and I think most of us who think. Brucie claimed he took the predicted action. -- Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hey idiots! Fuji sensor is 1/2.3" | Rich[_6_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 42 | March 2nd 10 05:34 AM |
Hey idiots! Fuji sensor is 1/2.3" | MikeWhy | Digital Photography | 39 | March 2nd 10 05:34 AM |
What if Fuji doubled the sensor size? | Rich | Digital Photography | 21 | April 18th 07 02:03 PM |
Wanted: SuperCCD SR camera | Bill Tuthill | Digital Photography | 1 | March 1st 05 03:42 AM |