thw2 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
curious80 wrote:
The numbers quoted by photozone are not lp/mm, they are lp/picture height, so the larger sensor size is already accounted for.
From the site itself:
"Please note that the tests results are NOT comparable across the different systems! This does also apply for the new EOS tests based on the EOS 50D because of differences in the sensor system (e.g. AA-filter) as well as DIFFERENT RAW-CONVERTERS."
I hope you can read. One can only tell relative performance (say, edge vs center) within the SAME platform. You cannot go around quoting and comparing ABSOLUTE numbers from Photozone, and claim them as facts.
If you want to convince others you are correct, SHOW IT! Demonstrate side-by-side testing with identical lighting, set-up and camera settings
Addendum:
Even DPReview editors talk about this. In this case using lines per picture height, m43 actually has an advantage due to the 4:3 aspect ratio as compared to 3:2 on APS-C.
This is an interesting thread. Ultimately, the overall success of a new platform depends on the choice of the masses, not the opinions of a few in forums. To appeal to the masses, one needs to address ALL of the following: image quality, compactness and wide range of lens choices (BOTH zooms and primes). Current mirrorless platforms do not meet all the listed criteria. For example, to convince anyone to switch from APS-C to:
a) m43: show me improved dynamic range at low ISO and a stabilized 1:1 macro lens with f equivalent to 160 mm or more (in 35 mm terms)
b) v1/j1: show me a shallow depth of field, better image quality and more lenses
c) NEX and X-pro1: show me the lenses
d) X100: show me the lenses... ooops, it's fixed.
So, ultimately, Canon got it right: they need only miniaturize current interchangeable cameras and they have a winner.
I also find it amusing that many camera reviewers love to bash the Rebel cameras for being too small etc, but have no complaints about current mirrorless cameras. So much for impartial reviewers.
|