When a camera has one, it typically resides between the lens and the sensor, so all images are affected by the degree of the AA filter, regardless of whether you are shooting in RAW or jpg mode.
The processing required to contend with AA filter is either done in camera by using the jpg mode or must be done in Post Processing.
I do not know the degree of AA in the 5D MK II or in yours ... but I do know that Canon has been known to use a heavy handed AA filter in different models, while other mfr\'s opt for something different. I have some great glass, but the AA filter produces some heavy blur that must be sharpened out in post (or let the camera do it in jpg). So while one might think that RAW vs. RAW will compare the lenses ... only if shot on the same model (ideally same camera). I specifically spent the $$ to go from a MK II to a MK II N for this very reason after a lengthy search as to why my RAW images were so soft.
Accordingly, any criticism of the sharpness of a handheld RAW file regarding the lens, does not necessarily hold true. If the image had been shot tripod, timer, MLU on a Kodak SLR/c (no AA filter) ... then we could make some better evaluations regarding the lens mounted to it. Unfortunately, the AA filter in RAW varies widely between models (& likely even more so between formats). On the surface, your argument presents better than one might have anticipated, but there are still too many issues in play for it to be meritable.
When a camera has one, it typically resides between the lens and the sensor, so all images are affected by the degree of the AA filter, regardless of whether you are shooting in RAW or jpg mode.
The processing required to contend with AA filter is either done in camera by using the jpg mode or must be done in Post Processing.
I do not know the degree of AA in the 5D MK II or in yours ... but I do know that Canon has been knows to use a heavy handed AA filter in different models, while other mfr\'s opt for something different. I have some great glass, but the AA filter produces some heavy blur that must be sharpened out in post (or let the camera do it in jpg). So while one might think that RAW vs. RAW will compare the lenses ... only if shot on the same model (ideally same camera).
Accordingly, any criticism a the sharpness of a handheld RAW file regarding the lens, does not necessarily hold true. If the image had been shot tripod, timer, MLU on a Kodak SLR/c (no AA filter) ... then we could make some better evaluations regarding the lens mounted to it. Unfortunately, the AA filter in RAW varies widely between models (& likely even more so between formats). On the surface, your argument presents better than one might have anticipated, but there are still too many issues in play for it to be meritable.
When a camera has one, it typically resides between the lens and the sensor, so all images are affected by the degree of the AA filter, regardless of whether you are shooting in RAW or jpg mode.
The processing required to contend with AA filter is either done in camera by using the jpg mode or must be done in Post Processing.
I do not know the degree of AA in the 5D MK II or in yours ... but I do know that Canon has been knows to use a heavy handed AA filter in different models, while other mfr\'s opt for something different. I have some great glass, but the AA filter produces some heavy blur that must be sharpened out in post (or let the camera do it in jpg). So while one might think that RAW vs. RAW will compare the lenses ... only if shot on the same model (ideally same camera).
Accordingly, any criticism a the sharpness of a handheld RAW file regarding the lens, does not necessarily hold true. If the image had been shot tripod, timer, MLU on a Kodak SLR/c (no AA filter) ... then we could make some better evaluations regarding the lens mounted to it. Unfortunately, the AA filter in RAW varies widely between models (& likely even more so between formats). On the surface, your argument presents better than one might have anticipated, but there are still too many issues in play for it to be meritable.
When a camera has one, it typically resides between the lens and the sensor, so all images are affected by the degree of the AA filter, regardless of whether you are shooting in RAW or jpg mode.
The processing required to contend with AA filter is either done in camera by using the jpg mode or must be done in Post Processing.
Feb 06, 2010 at 12:34 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #8098662 « Leica 100mm APO macro - hard to beat »
