« on: October 18, 2011, 12:22:05 PM »
9% larger pixels seems less significant to me (and I think the numbers back this up) than just the typical generational change in the sensor production technology and other patented elements that are esoteric and do not follow this easy (and I think misleading) apparent mathematical relationship - like improving microlenses, or most importantly improvements in the photon to signal capture chain (including the ADC).
That seems sensible. It's just interesting that a Canon USA engineer chose pixel size as the one thing to highlight, and not all the other aspects.
Well, since the number of pixels got smaller, he sure as heck couldn't highlight that, right?
I think that's the definition of marketing and PR