« on: January 31, 2015, 04:43:07 PM »
Figure this, at 50mp, will it be the equal of a Hasselblad? No way. Pixel size does matter. Larger ones are typically better, but when you are constrained by 35mm format, fitting more means making them smaller. Increases in resolution comes at the cost of smaller pixels. Thus, smaller pixels will have to become more efficient and accurate. The rumored 6400 ISO is an indication that efficiency wasn't increased much at all - they're just putting out high mega pixel count.
K, I agree with most of your comments. This one, I'm not so sure. If the smaller pixels were the reason for the ISO 6400 limit, would we not see the same limit on the 7DII? I believe the pixels are about the same size, yet the 7DII goes to ISO 16,000. In addition, it has been reported that the quantum efficiency of the 7DII is higher than that of earlier Canon sensors, including full frame.
I would think the biggest differences/advantages of medium format are:
1. Shallower depth of field.
2. Larger sensor = more light.
Anyway, food for thought...
I thought the limiting factor in this case was the heavier CFA design. Get more color depth, sacrifice sensitivity?
Yep. That's what's being reported, and it would seem to make sense to me. Still wondering if there's some artificial limiting at play, too, in order to more clearly differentiate this body for its target segment...