K5 (or nice dslr equiv) vs GXR A12 M: detail after post-process

Started Nov 23, 2011 | Discussions thread
Collie Camp
Regular MemberPosts: 162
Like?
Re: K5 (or nice dslr equiv) vs GXR A12 M: detail after post-process
In reply to drechor, Nov 23, 2011

drechor wrote:

I also have a CV 35/1.7, Jupiter-8 50/2 and Canon LTM 50/1.8 hanging around.

If you want to get rid of your 35mmf1.7 and if it is the black version, sent me a mail

My question about detail, re lack of AA filter in the GXR: how would you compare K5/D7000/Sony A** files, post-processed, to your GXR-M files out of camera? I.e., how much of an effect does the lack of an AA filter have after you have put your files from a dslr and the GXR-M through the wringer? I'm generally referring to sharpness-boosting operations in PP.

I can compare my M Mount with RAWs of: Pentax K7, Sony a850, Canon 5dII and Panasonic GF-1.

I think, the most effect is visible in the textures aka bricks in a wall, the fine structure of surfaces. The RAWs of the GXR Mount, the Canon 5dII and the GF-1 are clearly sharper there compared to the Pentax and Sony. Between these three for me the differences is nearly invisible...even at 200%. 5dII and Gf-1 seem to have very weak AA fiters.

Regarding pp the differences become even smaller, though you could extract more texture detail from the these three than from Pentax K7 or Sony a850.

As much as I like the K5, if the files from the GXR-M (and I'm not talking about usability; I'm sure I'd like shooting with the GXR-M better) are that much more detailed even after PP, I'd really consider the GXR, even if the dynamic range and resolution isn't as good.

try to compare the RAWs of GF-1, 5dII and K5 here in the dpreview comparision page - that might answer your question best. depends on the user how much difference it makes for your photografy.

Regards.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow