telyt wrote:
Your P&S looks pretty good in this comparison, and if all you want to compare is thrice\'s photo (probably not made for comparison purposes) and your test photo then be happy. If you wish to believe the emperor has no clothes then go ahead & knock yourself out.
IMHO a more generally-applicable comparison would include side-by-side photos under a variety of test conditions, side-by-side photos under real-world conditions, and real-world photos made where each camera system shows its strengths and weaknesses.
Oh for sure. I would indeed trade mine for his... any day! I\'ll take the tonal qualities, sensitivities, and dynamic range of his system over the sharpness (on a 2/3 sensor) of mine any day. Not to mention the resale price! His is the better system. But the sharpness of his lens though? On a FF sensor I suppose it\'s good. Put in on a 2/3 sensor though and ... well, you see the results here. At least I think I did them correctly.
RustyBug wrote:
Does your camera have an AA filter, if so what amount of blur does it apply?
Ummm, I\'m not really sure. There is nothing in the menus about AA (I assume this is anti-aliasing?) and I shot RAW so wouldn\'t AA only apply to JPEGs? I\'ve never investigated AA on a camera. This is a 6 year \"bridge\" camera called the dIMAGE A2. You can read about it here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A2/A2P.HTM or just read about the lens at the same site here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A2/A2A5.HTM I can tell that while it\'s \"pretty good\" it\'s nothing too special. Especially considering some of the \"bridge\" models that have been released since.
telyt wrote:
Your P&S looks pretty good in this comparison, and if all you want to compare is thrice\'s photo (probably not made for comparison purposes) and your test photo then be happy. If you wish to believe the emperor has no clothes then go ahead & knock yourself out.
IMHO a more generally-applicable comparison would include side-by-side photos under a variety of test conditions, side-by-side photos under real-world conditions, and real-world photos made where each camera system shows its strengths and weaknesses.
Oh for sure. I would indeed trade mine for his... any day! I\'ll take the tonal qualities, sensitivities, and dynamic range of his system over the sharpness of mine any day. Not to mention the resale price! His is the better system. But the sharpness of his lens though? On a FF sensor I suppose it\'s good. Put in on a 2/3 sensor though and ... well, you see the results here. At least I think I did them correctly.
RustyBug wrote:
Does your camera have an AA filter, if so what amount of blur does it apply?
Ummm, I\'m not really sure. There is nothing in the menus about AA (I assume this is anti-aliasing?) and I shot RAW so wouldn\'t AA only apply to JPEGs? I\'ve never investigated AA on a camera. This is a 6 year \"bridge\" camera called the dIMAGE A2. You can read about it here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A2/A2P.HTM or just read about the lens at the same site here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A2/A2A5.HTM I can tell that while it\'s \"pretty good\" it\'s nothing too special. Especially considering some of the \"bridge\" models that have been released since.
Feb 06, 2010 at 12:27 PM
Previous versions of Bifurcator's message #8098632 « Leica 100mm APO macro - hard to beat »
His is the better system. But the sharpness of his lens though? On a FF sensor I suppose it\'s good. Put in on a 2/3 sensor though and ... well, you see the results here. At least I think I did them correctly.