The latest on the 5D Mk3

ChuckingFluff wrote in post #11306728
I always think the 5diii is going to be a 7D with a full frame sensor and improved native ISO.

After seeing some of the raw file samples coming from the Pentax K5 I'm hoping that the delay of the 1DsMkVI and then the 5D3 is because Canon is trying to catch up and feverishly working on a sensor that too will deliver near noiseless ISO51200.

sapearl wrote in post #11305464
Another way of looking at it Ricardo is that us gents are simply diamonds in the rough. On bad days though they tend to treat us like cubic zirconias ......

...or schist!

RDKirk wrote in post #11299655
No. The size of the motion blur striking the sensor is a matter of the length of the exposure. It is a physical, measurable property. If the size of the motion blur is less than about 0.035mm, it will be imperceptible at normal reading distances to the average person.

It does not matter what the resolution of the sensor is--regardless of whether that 0.035mm blur is made of 0.0025mm pixels or 0.005mm pixels or 0.01mm pixels, it will still be imperceptible.

If you begin enlarging that 0.035mm blur on a print, you eventually enlarge it to the point of visual perceptibility at normal reading distance, usually by 10x, when the size of the blur on the display reaches about 0.3mm. At that point, the viewer says, "Hmm, that looks fuzzy."

The measurable size of the blur at 10x will be 0.3mm regardless of the resolution of the sensor.

It seems you're missing the point. Yes SS affects motion blur. BUT with more MP you have more pixels constructing an element of motion blur, therefore you don't have to enlarge it much to notice that blur. SO more MP = they notice it more.

Maybe if you go back and read what I read carefully you'd see.

Ricardo222 wrote in post #11307504
...or schist!

Schist Happens...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #11316184
Schist Happens...

Yep, and we're full of it!

I thought Schist had a list and Spielberg made a movie about it mainly in black and white.

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #11316222
I thought Schist had a list and Spielberg made a movie about it mainly in black and white.

Uncultured fellow! NO-ONE would have made a film called "Schist's List"!

Ricardo222 wrote in post #11316262
Uncultured fellow! NO-ONE would have made a film called "Schist's List"!

Oh Schnapps!

jdizzle wrote in post #11316285
Oh Schnapps!

Hehehehe

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #11316171
It seems you're missing the point. Yes SS affects motion blur. BUT with more MP you have more pixels constructing an element of motion blur, therefore you don't have to enlarge it much to notice that blur. SO more MP = they notice it more.

Maybe if you go back and read what I read carefully you'd see.

Did you get more blur switching from Tri-X to Pan-X at the same shutter speed?

It doesn't matter if you have "more pixels constructing an element of motion blur." You can't see 0.003mm of blur, regardless of how many pixels are constructing it. The number of pixels does not make it a larger blur.

RDKirk wrote in post #11316739
Did you get more blur switching from Tri-X to Pan-X at the same shutter speed?

It doesn't matter if you have "more pixels constructing an element of motion blur." You can't see 0.003mm of blur, regardless of how many pixels are constructing it. The number of pixels does not make it a larger blur.

OK I'll edit this post and be nice. Yes you're right... you win. Film and digital are exactly the same in every way.

Play nicely children...

tim wrote in post #11318954
Play nicely children...

LOL I let him win, how much nicer can you get?!

id like to grab one of these if they ever come lol

UnknownPhotographer wrote in post #11358069
id like to grab one of these if they ever come lol

You mean smash and grab? Take one for me too, please!