Re: M9 - Full Frame - 18 Mpix - IR filter
David J Taylor
news:kkpha5tegr29bmkoj...@4ax.com...
[]
> It is actually an *excellent* design decision, because the loss of
> sharpness caused by an AA filter is very significant indeed. Coupled
> with the 18 MP sensor, the omission of the AA filter means that the M9
> is capable of resolving very fine detail.
No, it doesn't "resolve" the very fine detail, it aliases very fine detail
into spurious coarse detail.
> There is an obvious risk of moire effects, some of which cannot be
> corrected in software. However, this is something that will interest
> measurbators rather than the shooters who will greatly value the M9's
> ability to resolve fine detail.
The sample shots have already shown how bad the problems can be.
BTW: why wasn't this discussion in rec.photo.digital.rangefinder?
Cross-posted & follow-ups set.
David
Bruce
<david-...@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>"Bruce" <docne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:kkpha5tegr29bmkoj...@4ax.com...
>[]
>> It is actually an *excellent* design decision, because the loss of
>> sharpness caused by an AA filter is very significant indeed. Coupled
>> with the 18 MP sensor, the omission of the AA filter means that the M9
>> is capable of resolving very fine detail.
>
>No, it doesn't "resolve" the very fine detail, it aliases very fine detail
>into spurious coarse detail.
Such certainty is impressive. Perhaps you will be kind enough to post
your own shots taken with the M9 on the basis of which you were able
to make such a definitive judgment? Otherwise, why don't you simply
shut up.
There is nothing so useless as someone who posts opinions about
equipment he has never seen, let alone touched, let alone used.
David J Taylor
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:35:53 GMT, "David J Taylor"
> <david-...@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>No, it doesn't "resolve" the very fine detail, it aliases very fine
>>detail
>>into spurious coarse detail.
>
> Such certainty is impressive. Perhaps you will be kind enough to post
> your own shots taken with the M9 on the basis of which you were able
> to make such a definitive judgment? Otherwise, why don't you simply
> shut up.
>
> There is nothing so useless as someone who posts opinions about
> equipment he has never seen, let alone touched, let alone used.
Others have already pointed to examples. It's a well-known characteristic
of any sampled data system without adequate filtering.
David