fraga Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Yet Another Tamron 150-600 Thread! Interesting Observations -- | |
Well, I didn't actually say that with a higher resolution crop sensor it would be worse than a FF sensor with less pixel density.
In fact, it is not, look at the last side by side pictures of the OP.
What I said (or at least tried to) was that a higher pixel density sensor will put more stress on a lens.
It will show the lens weaker points a lot more. Do you agree?
It is, after all, a magnified image of what would be a shot taken with a sensor with less pixel density.
That is why people often say here that with a high MP sensor, you shouldn't inspect the files at 100% and expert very sharp results. This has been repeated ad nauseum in this forum.
With a 8MP camera, results are often sharp at 100%. The exact same lens on a 18MP camera, and the results at 100% might not appear as sharp, though, in reality, you do have more detail (resolution) there.
So the problem here could be that the 5D II sensor does not have the potential to extract more detail that the one provided by the lens wide open. The lens, wide open, out resolves the sensor. So when you close down the aperture, you get more DOF but not much more detail.
This does not invalidate the fact that "The optimal aperture of a lens is the same for all pixel densities". It is, of course. The lens is independent from the camera. But what if the sensor cannot resolve more than what it already does with the lens wide open?
On the other hand, the 7D, with more pixel density, is able to extract more detail as the lens approaches the optimal aperture.
As an example of what I was trying to say, if the problem is indeed related to pixel density, a D800 should yield a similar result to the 7D, that is to say, it will display a more noticeable difference between wide open and at optimal aperture.
I could be completely wrong here, as I am far from being an expert, like the previous posters before me.
This is just an explanation of what I was trying to say, as I never intended to imply that we would be worse with a higher resolution sensor.
I think the last picture on the OP proves that.
As an analogy, if you have a race car and suddenly put a lot more power in the engine, it will go around a circuit faster but it will also show that the brakes, suspension, chassis and tires need improvement, even if they appeared fine for the previous HP output.
The more powerful engine will reveal the shortcomings of the rest of the car, because the less powerful version was not enough to stress those components enough.
All thing being equal, the driver of the more powerful version will complain about the brakes and suspension and tires. The other, not so much or not at all.
Not a very good analogy, sorry, I hope you can understand what I was trying to say, since English is not my first language.
|