I will post a screen grab later.

Don

:D :D :D

Stephen,

Just a thought that high resolution sensor could be negated by poor optics. Under normal circumstances this lens would not be attatched to the X so I have no idea what I will end up with.

Don

hi Don, found the dialogue box, on "save" of image.
Sorted. Now no compression.

The camera will store in either jpeg or raw.
raw is 54 frames per 1Gb XD.

Thanks, Raymond

Interesting comments re the no of pixels etc.I took some Heron shots using the E4500,(through a scope,but makes no difference to the pixel size-I don't think-),and had them printed in an A3 size ,they looked great.

Well despite the very poor light I gave the lens test a go.
Lenses used : 55mm AIS Micro Nikkor and Stevies Sigma 28 - 200mm Aspherical IF Macro zoom. Aperture throughout f8 and the cameras were mounted on my Slik Professional tripod, and a cable release was used.

Not the best test conditions with the poor light resulting in exposure of 1/10 sec at f8 ISO 400. It is quite obvious that even at f8 the zoom is soft at the corners and overall not as sharp as the prime.

As mentioned earlier in the thread re D2X images and shrinking for posting if the image is high in detail. The full frame here is from the D100 and despite reducing to this size, it had to be compressed to 35% in 'save for web' to achieve this file size.

Don

From the brickwall test above, it seems using a high resolution lens is more important than megapixels alone.

I agree Stephen hence looking at doing the test.

When I upgraded my pc before getting the X I noticed an improvement with the D100 if I used raw and converted in NC. Next up was comparing a couple of my old manual lenses with my mid price range zoom. Again a noticeable improvement. If I had the D1X at the time, rather than the D100 which would not meter with the AIS lenses, I doubt I would have gone the route of getting the D2X. I would then have been able to afford a top notch mid-range A/F zoom like the 17-55 f2.8 and a 300 f4 to suplement my M/F lenses.

In terms of sensor and processing engine development I would expect your Hs with your glass to exceed my D100 and 55mm or 105mm in image quality. I remember when I posted my origional X or Hs thread there was a touch of ' is he mad ' Hs is only 4mp.

Don

Excellent. Quite clearly the lens is the weak link in the chain, and a quality lens beats more pixels. Not an intuitive result (or at least not for me).

I presume the crops from the D100 are 100%? Sorry if that is a dumb question.

Not a dumb question at all Leif, dumb on my part not to say :o . Yes all are 100% crops. The D2X was downsized from raw in NX before converting to Tiff. Tiffs then cropped in CS and converted to Jpegs and put onto a single frame in Paint Shop then saved at 20% compression.

Your gallery pics with the 200 micro, are a prime example of quality glass in use.

On my budget I am restricted to looking at one or two M/F classics to try and keep up with you and Foxy on the IQ front.

Don

Fascinating tests Don & Stephen and it seems to demonstrate that quality glass is the most important factor. That makes seems to me when I think about it. After all, if the lens can not resolve the detail, it doesn't matter how many pixels the sensor has, it can't recover the missing information.

This reminds me of a test I read in a hi-fi magazine back in the mid 80s (I think). They took a nominal £1000 budget and put two systems together. In the first they spent ~equal amounts on turntable (remember those), amp and speakers selecting their 'editor’s choice' products at that price point. For the second they selected a Linn LP12 turntable costing almost £800 and spent £100 each on amp and speakers again selecting editor’s choice budget products. The aim was to test the perceived wisdom of equal budget expenditure, against the philosophy that if you had a top class turntable to extract the maximum information off the vinyl record, even with a budget amp and speakers, to see which would be the more involving musical experience.

For those of you who have heard, or heard of, the legendary LP12 I won’t have to tell you the result :D

So the motto seems to be don't compromise on your lenses, if budget is an issue compromise on the camera body, and upgrade your lenses before letting the marketing hype of more megapixels persuade you into upgrading the camera. Providing they are sharp, images off a 6/8mp sensor will easily make good A3 prints.