Pixel per pixel, which DSLR produces the best image?

I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?

In article . com,
"RichA" wrote:

I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?

The Canon 20D, of course.

Why? Because I own that model.

However, on Thursdays after 1700 zulu, the Nikon D80 slightly excels within
the reduced 8MP criteria, except when Jupiter aligns with Mars.

(This guy really IS a troll, isn't he?)
--

JR

Canon EOS 20D

"Jim Redelfs" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
"RichA" wrote:

I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?

The Canon 20D, of course.

Why? Because I own that model.

However, on Thursdays after 1700 zulu, the Nikon D80 slightly excels
within
the reduced 8MP criteria, except when Jupiter aligns with Mars.

(This guy really IS a troll, isn't he?)
--

JR

Canon EOS 20D

He is without question the biggest asshole in the world. And most likely a
catamite.

On Feb 13, 8:59 pm, Jim Redelfs wrote:
In article . com,

"RichA" wrote:
I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?

The Canon 20D, of course.

Why? Because I own that model.

However, on Thursdays after 1700 zulu, the Nikon D80 slightly excels within
the reduced 8MP criteria, except when Jupiter aligns with Mars.

(This guy really IS a troll, isn't he?)
--

JR

Canon EOS 20D

It could very well be a Canon. But it isn't the 20D.

On 14 Feb 2007 04:04:11 -0800, "RichA" wrote:

On Feb 13, 8:59 pm, Jim Redelfs wrote:
In article . com,

"RichA" wrote:
I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?

The Canon 20D, of course.

Why? Because I own that model.

However, on Thursdays after 1700 zulu, the Nikon D80 slightly excels within
the reduced 8MP criteria, except when Jupiter aligns with Mars.

(This guy really IS a troll, isn't he?)
--

JR

Canon EOS 20D

It could very well be a Canon. But it isn't the 20D.

Well, since you know what it *isn't*, why don't you know what it *is*?
And why isn't the 20D the best for what you asked about?

--
Senator Barack Obama announced
his candidacy for president
Saturday from the courthouse
steps in Springfield. He looked
good. When most Illinois politicians
are photographed standing on the
courthouse steps they're wearing
orange jumpsuits.

Bill Funk wrote:
On 14 Feb 2007 04:04:11 -0800, "RichA" wrote:

On Feb 13, 8:59 pm, Jim Redelfs wrote:
In article . com,

"RichA" wrote:
I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?
The Canon 20D, of course.

Why? Because I own that model.

However, on Thursdays after 1700 zulu, the Nikon D80 slightly excels within
the reduced 8MP criteria, except when Jupiter aligns with Mars.

(This guy really IS a troll, isn't he?)
--

JR

Canon EOS 20D
It could very well be a Canon. But it isn't the 20D.

Well, since you know what it *isn't*, why don't you know what it *is*?
And why isn't the 20D the best for what you asked about?

I don't think it's the 20d. From images I've seen, it looked like the
Phase One P25 blitzed the 1DS II, and beat the 5d for pixel level
sgarpness. The P45 seemed to suffer from the diminishing returns that
the higher pixel count small slrs have - but perhaps the owner couldn't
afford good glass.

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:09:59 -0800, RichA wrote
(in article . com):

I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?


If you really want to do pixel by pixel, then you have to decide which camera
produces the best image from a single pixel. Then, you can get even finer.
For example, is the green pixel in the top left corner of the sensor really
that much better in a Nikon D80 than in the Canon 5D? Curious minds want to
know.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
e.com...
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:09:59 -0800, RichA wrote
(in article . com):

I know 1DsMkII produces the "best" images, but it's got 16
megapixels. How about if you take say 8 megapixel areas from each
camera that has 8 or more, which comes out on top then?


If you really want to do pixel by pixel, then you have to decide which
camera
produces the best image from a single pixel. Then, you can get even finer.
For example, is the green pixel in the top left corner of the sensor
really
that much better in a Nikon D80 than in the Canon 5D? Curious minds want
to
know.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor



If it wasn't for the Lack of hi ISO performance, the SIGMA SD14 seems to be
a good Idea, but we might not ever see one.
They claim 14 MPs as I might agree from the fact there is 14 million
detection cells on it 4.6M reds, 4.6M greens, and 4.6M blues .
The other good thing this bring is a blurring filter does not need to be
added on the front of the sensor. From their past cameras maybe the bugs
will be less in this one.
The thing they did fix, such a simple idea to keep dust off the sensor, was
to put a clear cover located a small distance from it.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:10:51 -0800, JSF wrote
(in article ):




If it wasn't for the Lack of hi ISO performance, the SIGMA SD14 seems to be
a good Idea, but we might not ever see one.
They claim 14 MPs as I might agree from the fact there is 14 million
detection cells on it 4.6M reds, 4.6M greens, and 4.6M blues .

Odd. On most cameras half the pixels are green.


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On Feb 15, 4:10 am, "JSF" wrote:
The other good thing this bring is a blurring filter does not need to be
added on the front of the sensor. From their past cameras maybe the bugs
will be less in this one.

Actually, a blur filter is needed in any discrete sampling device,
whatever the domain in which it operates is, unless you are going to
sample at such a higher frequency than the one you use that the error
becomes irrelevant (which won't be the case for imaging for the
foreseeable future). Leaving it out results in two things (imaging
terminology): sharper images and aliasing artifacts. In CFA cameras,
these can manifest themselves as colour errors, so it is indeed more
troublesome in CFA cameras than in these Foveon sensors; but they're
still there in both cases.