http://presscentre.sony.eu/Content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=274&NewsAreaID=2
24.6 megapixels - quite a beast!
24.6 megapixels - quite a beast!
24.6 megapixels - quite a beast!
24MP is about the right number for a full frame camera. The frame size would be 4000x6000 pixels over a 24x36 millimeter frame. The sensor should be able to properly sample the image projected by a good quality lens. There is not need for more pixels. Looks like the end of the "pixel race". (And no, they won't make better lenses they are diffraction limited much of the time already.)
It works out that the 24MP sensor has the same pixel size as a 10.6MP "DX" size sensor.
I've been scanning 35mm film and only the best film shot with good technique hold up to a 4000 DPI scan. With this camera digital finally has caught up to where film was 40 years ago in terms in image quality.
dpreview preview says $3000. And it has a 100% viewfinder and antishake!
DPReview has also posted images which look, well, not as nice as I was expecting (to put it mildly...especially in the high ISO noise department).
When talking in sensor sizes of 35mm right? You're neglecting MF size sensors or Camera Red.
At first glance I'd agree with you. Hopefully people aren't expecting D3/D700-level high ISO performance, though - it flat-out ain't gonna happen with a 24MP sensor.
But I'd at least expect 1DsIII-like noise performance from this sensor, and it's not even close.
Your forgetting that the MK 1ds Mark III costs 8 thousand dollars while the sony is only 3 Thousand, not to mention the sony has more mega pixels.
For pro photographers, I think high-ISO performance may not matter much in this case because the obvious application is studio work.
With all due respect, not even half of "pro photographers" are studio photographers.
With all due respect returned to you - the majority of pro photographers interested in this camera most likely ARE studio photographers.
How many studio photographers do you think would dump their mamiya or hassy or even canon systems for this sony system?
How many studio photographers do you think would dump their mamiya or hassy or even canon systems for this sony system? There are not many reasons that I can think of. Can you think of any? (sincere question)
Your forgetting that the MK 1ds Mark III costs 8 thousand dollars while the sony is only 3 Thousand, not to mention the sony has more mega pixels.
When your livelihood depends on producing the best possible result, $3000 versus $8000 is basically irrelevant.
How many studio photographers do you think would dump their mamiya or hassy or even canon systems for this sony system? There are not many reasons that I can think of. Can you think of any? (sincere question)
I'm very happy with a 12MP full frame camera; but I know some people have been screaming for this.
How many studio photographers do you think would dump their mamiya or hassy or even canon systems for this sony system? There are not many reasons that I can think of. Can you think of any? (sincere question)