Just saw that Fuji has come out with a 12 Meg digital SLR camera and I was surprised by the quantum leap in pixels. I made a joke once that when an affordable digital SLR with 20 million pixels hit the market for $1500, I'd go digital. Looks like I may be picking one up sooner than I thought.

12 Meg digital camera

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), February 02, 2002

Answers

Don't know why the automatic link above won't work, here it is http://www.dpreview.com/news/0201/02013003fujifilms2pro.asp

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), February 02, 2002.

Another week goes by as I debate taking the Leica plunge and another week where the initial cost outlay vs. longevity of film ratio makes it more difficult to justify ...

But as someone who just spent the better part of 3 hours trying to make a single passable b/w print on an Epson 890, all the pixels in the world won't amount to a hill of beans to me until the quality/ease of digital b/w output is improved.

-- aric blair (aricblair101@earthlink.net), February 02, 2002.

What they don't tell you about pixels? I got interested in digital and obtained a NIKON 950 3 megapixel. Shooting at 2 megapixel I can bet 60+ images on a 64 Meg card approximately 1 meg for a picture. At 2 meg you can get a fair 8 X 10. 3 megapixels increases the storage to 16 meg thus you can bet 4 images on a 64 meg card. A 64 meg card runs about $40. If you want to shoot 3 meg looking for enlargement of 8X10 and beyond to shoot 1 pic you need an investment of $10. I cannot imagine what a 12 megapixel requires. Personaly I would buy a 2 megapixel camera and use it as a polaroid.

-- Gene Kent (e.kent@attbi.com), February 02, 2002.

It is not a 12M camera. It is a 6M actual pixel camera that interpolates it out to a 12M file size. See below quote:

New 3rd Generation Super CCD sensor and advanced LSI algorithm (6.17 million effective pixels) producing an astounding 12 million recorded pixels (4256 x 2848)

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 03, 2002.

I went into the camera store yesterday and handled the 4 mp Canon G2. Sorry guys but that is my next Leica purchase. Cheers.

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), February 03, 2002.

The chip is still slightly smaller than a 1/2 frame 35mm format - so the normal lens would be a 35 (We'll get all you 50mm lovers shooting the 35 pre-ASPH one way or another) ?8^)

The 12mm SuperHeliar suddenly begins to make sense - it would come out as a 18mm on this chip. The 15 would be like a 22mm.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), February 03, 2002.

i don't believe that digital camera technology has progressed much in the last two years. The rate of advancement has slowed down. It's just that the product trial and acceptance by customers has increased more than what people probably expected. The whole digital process ruins what Leica photography has made so special. The fact that a photographer has to think and be precise at that moment in order to get the perfect shot. Then he/she must wait in anticipation for the results....something I myself love.

But now there is digital as a substitute for this process. For some working photographers and other amatuers who are scared of this process, digital is great and the rewards are obvious. ......but the fact remains that digital (film equivelent) quality still is not within financial reach for most of us.....but hey, this may not be such a bad thing anyway...well it isn't for me and I would hope for other Leica photographers......or I'd ask the question, "what are you doing with a Leica?"

-- Kristian Dowling (leicashot@hotmail.com), February 03, 2002.

The whole digital process ruins what Leica photography has made so special. The fact that a photographer has to think and be precise at that moment in order to get the perfect shot. Then he/she must wait in anticipation for the results....something I myself love.

That's a ludicrous statement. Put a digital back on an existing Leica M and you'll still have to think and be precise about that moment in order to get the perfect shot. Just because you can fire off dozens of shots doesn't mean that the moment will ever come back. If they ever come out with a 20 megapixel back for the M... digital photography will mean that a battery pack will power 1 more thing in addition to the meter and you'll have to be extra careful about dropping your camera.

Digital is a legitimate medium.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 03, 2002.

...The whole digital process ruins what Leica photography has made so special. The fact that a photographer has to think and be precise at that moment in order to get the perfect shot. Then he/she must wait in anticipation for the results....something I myself love....

Actually, I thought that the whole point of Leica or 35MM photography was its spontaneity. That statement sounds like the descriptions I used to read about large format photography. In one sense, digital just takes the spontaneity factor to a new level. Reviewing your take while in the field is a powerful tool. So far as I can see, the major justification remaining for film photography is its immediacy. There is no shutter lag in an M and precious little in an R. I've gotten an awful lot of digital pix with the subject half out of the frame. Not only are there autofocusing lags but also delays in writing to storage.

-- Seth Honeyman (sdhoneyman@hotmail.com), February 03, 2002.

It seems to me that when a significant advance is made in bringing digital in a quality form to the masses, Leica users(some) see it as a threat. Personally, I think it is wonderful. I don't care if Leica ever embraces a digital M concept. I'll use an M when I want, and a digital other times. When I purchases my M6 I never thought it could replace a sophisticated digital body with IS telephoto zoom for animal pics. What I did think was that it would be great to have a small quiet mechanical body that is fun to use with superior optics. I think there are different tools for different jobs. If I could afford this new fuji, I would consider it. But it could never replace my other cameras or the features I like about them.

-- Chris Lutz (mesheca@yahoo.com), February 03, 2002.

I had the Fuji S1 which was touted as a 6 Meg but is actually a 3 Meg with interpolation, just as the S2 is 6 Meg with interpolation to 12 Meg. I did not find the images from the S1 any better than the Canon D30 I now own (plus, I can use Leica R lenses on the D30!). Just as I have been told how great you can make 20x30 pictures from digital files using some interpolation software to upsize. T'aint the same thing as having the detail there to start with. Next, there's the issue of security. How many backups do you need to make to prevent the sudden loss of years of images in a single media crash? Barring a fire or other natural disaster, negs and slides are reasonably safe. Then there's the issue of time value. Unless you have a lab do it (which they charge lots more than processing film)you *must* do a certain amount of processing in the computer to ready digital files for printing, especially if you shoot in the RAW mode which produces the highest resolution the camera has to offer. Not everyone wants to do this, and if one counts that time in terms of their hourly rate when employed in their careers, they might find that film/processing is still cheaper by far. And then there's cost and obsolescence. A top-end digital SLR body is in the $4000 and up range. Sure you can buy one for $2000, but it's about to be discontinued and was $3000 six months ago...just as the $5000 one today will be worth $2000 in a year or so. Only if you shoot $3000 worth of film or more in a year is it economically reasonable. However all these issues and then some will be solved quicker than we think. Once again I reiterate that unless Leica makes serious noises about a serious digital body they are planting nails in their own coffin.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 03, 2002.