WANNA KNOW HOW BIG YOUR SENSOR IS??

Oh, yes, when you get the fanatics "debating" on any of the subjects regarding which lens, sensors, apertures, etc War breaks out!!!

 

True, Steve.........but NOT superior to Pentax!!!!

 

You know as well as I do, Steve, that the camera is only a tool and it's the person behind it that makes the shot!!!
"merry xmas" By the way!!!

 

Not to my knowledge, Scrungee, and to be honest the opinion is that they haven't put out plans for one as they don't want to affect the market for their DSLRs, but the camera market is fast moving with fads and fashions changing quickly so you just never know.

 

@ARMANDII Are you calling me a 'tool' again?

 

Well, now that Steve and I have got the "Health" warnings about getting too tangled in the technical aspects out of the way the subject of crop factors on different types of sensors can be gone into.
We can all see the different areas of an image that different sensors can cover. Obviously, the bigger the sensor the more of the image it will see. But the crop factor of the type of sensor will also affect the attributes of the lens on the camera as well.
Take for example the Fujifilm XF1 compact camera which has a 2/3in [8.8 X 6.6.mm] sensor [which is around 25% bigger than the 1/17in usually used]. The crop factor will give a 3.03 focal magnification, which means that the lens [a 6.4-25.6mm zoom lens] will give the same angle of view as a 25-100mm lens on a full frame [35mm] camera. The Canon Powershot is another example as it has a different sized sensor [a 1/1.7 [7.6X5.7mm] ] which gives a crop factor of a 4.55 focal length magnification. The camera has a 5.2-26mm lens which equates to a 24-120mm lens with the crop factor magnification added in.
I'm not a pixel peeper and have seen many a 8 megapixel camera take images that out do a bigger pixel packed camera because the person taking the shot knew their camera. One of the problems of trying to satisfy the consumer urge for more and more pixels in the sensors is that the more pixels you stuff into smaller sensors the more "noise" and other effects arise. But increasingly more sophisticated software is coming to the rescue by alleviating the noise. There are so many reasons why a image might not be as you viewed it. J.Peg images are usually processed in the lossy compression mode which actually throws away a lot of the data and detail of the image to do it's job so you're not actually getting all the quality that you thought you might be!!

 

What do you mean, again??!!!

 

Hmmmmmmm, definitely maybe,Freddy. My K5 DSLR has a APS-C sensor with 16.5 megapixels but with the technology advancing so quickly in the software area which compensates for smaller sensors faults it really is difficult to tell without pixel peeping which image was taken with a, say, 4/3rds sensor and an APS-C sensor if taken by a knowledgeable/capable photographer. There is an optimum number of pixels that can be put in certain sizes of sensors and after that there is no real improvement or there is the effect of added noise.
Photosite technology has also taken great steps recently with the way they are constructed and record light so all that has to be taken into account when looking at the size of sensors and before dismissing the smaller ones.
Full frame sensors have in the past been expensive to produce but the market has been asking more and more that all manufacturers should produce them. There is no doubt among the professional and expert amateur that a full frame sensor [35mm] will record more detail and resolution. There are more and more photographers who are becoming expert and demanding and that's what is now driving manufacturers to slowly introducing Full Frame DSLRs and other types of Full Frame cameras.
Also the fact that manufacturers are starting to remove the anti-aliasing filter that is placed in front of sensors to "blur" the image with the intention of keeping down moire [noise]. Removing the anti-aliasing filter improves the detail and resolution recorded by the image but increases the chance of moire occurring when taking imaging of certain patterns [i.e. in clothing]. But that moire can now, with software, be removed or reduced.
So the chase is on for more resolution and detail, all of which is helped if you use a good lens and are aware that using a zoom on a CSC etc can cause compression which in effect brings the background of an image closer to the forefront than it is in reality. There's always a side effect to an ability that might have to be recognised and amended/avoided in some way.