Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Insider, post: 2742434, member: 24314&quot;]SuperDave posted:</p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>&quot;Quality</b> optical magnification is expensive and inefficient. I cannot imagine <i>ever</i> needing more than 10x optical, and have never actually used more than 5x in practice. If I ever need more detail, I will increase the sensor size and megapixel count to that end. 50x optical magnification on a modern 20+MP sensor would create an image of such size that a single serif on a letter could not be viewed in its&#039; entirety on a <b>large</b> monitor.....</p><p><br /></p><p>There is, even for me, an upper limit to how much magnification is necessary. A point is reached - more quickly than most realize - where the detail depicted cannot ever be proven to have happened by one process or another.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Actually, quality optics is expensive but it IS NOT INEFFICIENT.&nbsp; What</p><p>is inefficient at this time is trying to magnify coins with the pixels (is that what they are called?) from a camera.&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I can recall decades ago seeing a large image of a 1913 Liberty nickel in Coin World.&nbsp; The state-of-the-art digital camera made the coin look like a lumpy crude cast counterfeit.&nbsp; LOL!&nbsp; Sure, sure, its much better now but IMO, we ain&#039;t there yet outside of some possible extremely expensive NASA digital camera.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in