<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pixels: Size vs. Number</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mondaynote.com/2009/04/05/pixels-size-vs-number/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mondaynote.com/2009/04/05/pixels-size-vs-number/</link>
	<description>Media, Tech &#38; Business Models</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: The End of Megapixel Wars &#124; Monday Note</title>
		<link>http://www.mondaynote.com/2009/04/05/pixels-size-vs-number/#comment-1213</link>
		<dc:creator>The End of Megapixel Wars &#124; Monday Note</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 07:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=1637#comment-1213</guid>
		<description>[...] pictures in low light. (You might want to refer back to two Monday Notes on digital photography: Pixels Size vs. Number and More on Sensors Digital [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] pictures in low light. (You might want to refer back to two Monday Notes on digital photography: Pixels Size vs. Number and More on Sensors Digital [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: More on sensors [digital photography] &#124; Monday Note</title>
		<link>http://www.mondaynote.com/2009/04/05/pixels-size-vs-number/#comment-619</link>
		<dc:creator>More on sensors [digital photography] &#124; Monday Note</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2009 15:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=1637#comment-619</guid>
		<description>[...] Today, a similar debate goes on regarding the altogether simpler digital sensors. In the April 5th Monday Note #80, I took a first pass at the sensor size question, one that is, I believe, deliberately obscured by [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Today, a similar debate goes on regarding the altogether simpler digital sensors. In the April 5th Monday Note #80, I took a first pass at the sensor size question, one that is, I believe, deliberately obscured by [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: (virtual)void</title>
		<link>http://www.mondaynote.com/2009/04/05/pixels-size-vs-number/#comment-560</link>
		<dc:creator>(virtual)void</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 21:54:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=1637#comment-560</guid>
		<description>For a good comparison of the Foveon technology implementation vs comparable Bayer tech, please see:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a good comparison of the Foveon technology implementation vs comparable Bayer tech, please see:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/" rel="nofollow">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Cane</title>
		<link>http://www.mondaynote.com/2009/04/05/pixels-size-vs-number/#comment-559</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Cane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 16:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mondaynote.com/?p=1637#comment-559</guid>
		<description>I didn't know you were a camera buff (or that posts were done here on Sunday!).

Perhaps at some point you'll do an essay about current sensors in use versus the Foveon one that was never licensed by any major manufacturer for the mass market?
http://www.foveon.com/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I didn&#8217;t know you were a camera buff (or that posts were done here on Sunday!).</p>
<p>Perhaps at some point you&#8217;ll do an essay about current sensors in use versus the Foveon one that was never licensed by any major manufacturer for the mass market?<br />
<a href="http://www.foveon.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.foveon.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
