sebboh wrote:
i\'ve heard some people argue that color shows more subtlety with the sony converter. i\'ve not fiddled with it enough to have an opinion on that, but it\'s possible as color is not one of acr\'s strong points with sony files.
Hmm, it\'s probably because I don\'t know how to use the software properly yet but I\'m finding the colors to be perhaps the weakest point - they seem sort of muddy. I have not quite figured out how to get them to work - if I boost contrast I typically start blowing highlights and shadows.
douglasf13 wrote:
That NR look is another product if IDC. You\'ll really need to wait until LR3 supports the C3 to make any real pixel-level comparisons...or you could try RPP.
I could.. I have it installed on my laptop.. I\'m not sure if the C3 is supported yet though.
sebboh wrote:
interesting to see the differences in leica vs zeiss rendering here in addition to the camera differences.
Yes, but can you tell what differences the sensor is responsible for and what can be attributed to the lens? I think that according to the MTF charts the 50 MP should have a bit higher micro contrast in the fine detail, but then again that\'s exactly what an AA filter kills.
I\'m seeing higher edge contrast in the C3 shot, which would correspond to high micro contrast in the lower spatial frequencies 10-20 lp/mm, but again I\'m not sure if it is the sensor or the lens. My guess would be the sensor.
Jul 28, 2011 at 04:22 PM
Previous versions of denoir's message #9795327 « Sony NEX-C3 first impressions »
