Skip to Content
I think 22-megapixel is overkill.
Not a new mount, that's how I read it first, sounds like better quality glass that would allow you to resolve that detail without distortion... That resolution will expose glass quality, perhaps even with L lenses...
And you would be wrong.http://www.dansdata.com/images/d60/resolutions_big1024.gif
Not it you're shooting 40"x60" prints.
Name
E-mail
E-mail:
Password
Remember Me
E-Mail me when someone replies to this comment
Add your comments:
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments. And yes, comments are moderated.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ASTROBOT @ Feb 1st 2007 2:38PM
I think 22-megapixel is overkill.
Gautam Desai @ Feb 1st 2007 4:01PM
Not a new mount, that's how I read it first, sounds like better quality glass that would allow you to resolve that detail without distortion... That resolution will expose glass quality, perhaps even with L lenses...
Sinbios @ Feb 1st 2007 3:49PM
And you would be wrong.
http://www.dansdata.com/images/d60/resolutions_big1024.gif
Sinbios @ Feb 5th 2007 2:21PM
And you would be wrong.
http://www.dansdata.com/images/d60/resolutions_big1024.gif
Senor Pantalones @ Feb 1st 2007 4:14PM
Not it you're shooting 40"x60" prints.