hmmm... the stating of technical specifications and industry standards are not simply "claims" nor do they constitute "marketing" (this forum does not permit ADVERTISING).
I would suggest that the prints you saw were not enlarged to equal degrees because there simply is no comparison. Seitz sacrifices dynamic range for speed AND, once again, is only recording 1/3rd of the color data in a rasterized pattern. I certainly don't see a "noticeable improvement" between these two images:
one from Seitz's site;
http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/intern...d925/f1002.cfm
and one from a BL users site (NOT BL's site) at only 62% rez;
http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/panorama/watson_uva.html
Pay attention to the roof, brick and and other fine architectural detail and clock face found on the central dome here in the middle of campus. Also note the size of the little highlighted navigation indicator when zoomed all the way in. I do not see ANY comparison what so ever. I'd welcome links to other examples for a better example of a Seitz image but presume that Seitz would only post respectable examples showing their best capabilities.
BL has relentlessly been subjected to numerous shootouts, comparisons, analysis, discussions and articles for over a decade now and has always set the standard by which all other digital imaging is judged against. The only remaining competition in the market place that comes close are Cruse and Anagram, both of which effectively use identical technology and both of which, like Seitz, are remarkably more expensive.
Bookmarks