Thanks, Alex. As I mentioned, I am not really in anyway in need of more space. So, file size is not a problem at all. When I go out, I carry more than a 100 GB cards with me and at home I use 2TB LaCie RAID drives to store than.
Originally Posted by herbert
But I am really concerned about the quality. I really would love to know if this gives me a better quality, since I don't really need the huge resolution, I might as well just do sRAW for at least portrait.
Anyway, I was quoting Ken Rockwell:
"The smaller-sized images out of the 5D Mark II are spectacular. They are much, much sharper and cleaner than images from cameras on which that is their native resolution. When you start with over 20MP, it looks pretty good if you use all those to make 11MP or 5MP.
Why? Because they use less, or no, Bayer interpolation. No digital camera really resolves its rated resolution; they cheat and interpolate up, so at 100% at its rated resolution, no digital camera image is as sharp as a true scan from film.
At the 5MP setting, you have 100% R, G and B pixels, exactly as if you were using a Sigma Foveon sensor. If Sigma was selling this, they'd sell the 5MP (S) setting as if it were 15MP (also a lie).
What this means is that the lower resolution settings actually pack away lot more detail than you think. The S (5MP) setting of the 5D Mark II is a lot sharper than any 5MP camera."
Please let me know if you think differently now since I may have misquoted him.