Even worse is, "You take great pictures, we've bought this video camera, would you video our wedding?"

I started off saying "er, no", but then I had this great idea which worked out really well. I said that it would be great if the vid was passed around amongst all the guests for some random candid stuff. Some of the footage was quite good, and I didn't even have to edit it myself.

I got credit for the idea, and did about 2% of the work. Result!

I think the most likely reason for thinking that a camera with more MP is less sharp than its fewer-MP predecessor is thinking that you can crop more aggressively and expect the same sharpness.

True. But that isn't what's happening.

Algy's basic misunderstanding is the confusion of different magnification (which lenses of different focal length definitely do have), with different perspective, which is where object A and object B appear at different relative sizes (which only happens if the camera position changes).

This is why, for instance, he cites the magnification of a smaller crop from Tony's wider angle shot, as somehow 'not fair', where in fact, it shows precisely the relevant point, namely that the different lenses magnify differently, but show the same perspective at the same distance.

Until Algy understands this difference, he will continue to spout nonsense and post irrelevant links.

Tony, if there's one redeeming thing about this thread, it's you.

Of course they're not if you take the picture from a different distance, as you do - you're usually much closer with the WA.

There really are none so blind as those that will not see.

I saw exactly the same sort of thing with Picasa shortly after the K-5 came out.

It went away in a later version. Surprised they haven't sorted it yet, though, the K-5ii has been out for a while.

No, it's sixty quid, plus eight for the fruit bat (oops, wrong thread).

Unless it's worn below the knee

Yes, I know all that.

Try it