artur5 wrote:
I\'m not so skeptical regarding the micro lenses question. There\'s something in it.
If the AA filter was the only factor for poor corners, how do you explain that the Sony N5N beats both the old N5 and the new N7 not only on color vigneting but on corner sharpness as well ?. All three NEX models have AA and IR filters, in all probability very alike regarding thickness.
My opinion is that micro lenses arrangement and pixel density play also a role.
IR and AA filter types, distance of those filters to the sensor, CFA types, and pixel size all play a factor in astigmatism. You\'ll notice that Zeiss doesn\'t even mention special microlenses when talking about ZM lenses on digital in their wide angle paper, but, rather, sensor filters. Even with its \"special\" microlenses, just about any current CMOS has a better fill factor at the edges compared to the M9. I guess we need someone to rip off a Nex AA filter to see. Joakim probably knows the deal with the GXR microlenses. We should ask him.
artur5 wrote:
I\'m not so skeptical regarding the micro lenses question. There\'s something in it.
If the AA filter was the only factor for poor corners, how do you explain that the Sony N5N beats both the old N5 and the new N7 not only on color vigneting but on corner sharpness as well ?. All three NEX models have AA and IR filters, in all probability very alike regarding thickness.
My opinion is that micro lenses arrangement and pixel density play also a role.
IR and AA filter types, distance of those filters to the sensor, CFA types, and pixel size all play a factor in astigmatism. You\'ll notice that Zeiss doesn\'t even mention special microlenses when talking about ZM lenses on digital, but, rather, sensor filters. Even with its \"special\" microlenses, just about any current CMOS has a better fill factor at the edges compared to the M9. I guess we need someone to rip off a Nex AA filter to see.
Feb 05, 2012 at 01:35 PM
Previous versions of douglasf13's message #10312421 « Still no love for the Ricoh GXR? »