what is the difference between Mac and PC.

as some would say, one is better than the other, but, is it really so, or is it only what we percive, so with canon and nikon.

I remamber when I worked with the air lines in the eighties and hard drives needed a forklift to move them.

It is all in the little silicone chip, you need a computer engineer to answer your question.

some things I just take for granted and as Godless said, I go out there and shoot.

As Yoda said, do not be seduced by the dark side, or should that be

"by the dark side, be not seduced"

I believe those images are only used to help with Matrix metering, and have nothing to do with image processing, but I could be wrong.

Firmware.

Nikon stores reference images onboard the camera which are checked when a new image comes in. If the recorded image is similar enough to any in the library, it sets off a bunch of routines to process the image in ways to match the situation.

The system isn't perfect as images that don't match anything in the library don't get the same lovin'.

Oh how I do try, but you try something. What is the dark without the light?

Think less, shoot more.

If I can't use the search feature I apologize in advance, delete the thread. The Dx0 post got me thinking about what is really happening once the image goes through the sensor. Lens quality not withstanding, how on earth does that tiny little computer take several million little light intensities that are converted into data, and tweak the result so that it is so distinctly Nikon? I've looked at pictures from Canon and Nikon where the Canon has better resolution. The thing I can't get past, is that once it is output to my post process storage, the quality, yes, the quality of the image complements what my mind's eye wishes to remember about the detail. Sharpness becomes subjective at scale & detail begins to lie. Stuff just seems to fall off of the Canon image, where Nikon keeps it together and assembles a better picture.