pidera

I'm not a regular visitor of your site, but you did well Joe with adding this kind of quick explanations. You've clearly moved on since a while. I also found the 'evidence' sector with links. It is...

The images on the left are better, yes, but to me this advantage is not more apparent in the iso 6400 - iso 1600 comparison than in the iso 1600 - iso 400 comparison. Regards, Pieter

Yes I had to read that paragrph twice and decided it was best to ignore it :-D Note (as I am still typing) : in the lost post I wrote something like this : Equivalency is at it's best when used in...

Yes, the resolving power seems to be sensor-limited (nad not lens-limited), especially on the 5d. You can read more on the full test here . In practice it really is quite tricky to match images as...

When calculating some of the effects you describe, and which I experienced when performing tests using equivalent settings, I once kind of reinvented the bellows factor ! Cheers , P.

Oh dear, the reply I posted seems to have gone lost somewhere in the galaxy. No sign of it popping up here. Won't write it all again as I spent too much time already. And certainly there will be...

Yes I agree with your observations that the g7 results look slightly better and that this is probably due to the camera and lens operating at settings for which it is optimised (unlike the FF setup...

It is exactly these differences one sees when comparing images made using equivalent settings that make "equivalency" interesting, as they go beyond the obvious conclusions. The use of equivalent...

Canon 5d iso1600  Canon g7 iso80  I see roughly the same amount of noise in the iso1600 image as in the iso80 image. As expected given the cropfactor of roughly 4,75. Regards, P.

Here's a test I made some years ago : Canon 5d @ iso 1600 1/200 + Canon 70-200/4 @ 188mm f/22  Canon g7 @ iso 80 1/200 44,4mm f/4.8  So, what do we see ?

Yes, what a (unnecessary long) journey it has been ! ! !

1) understand equivalence 2) understand the typical limitations (lowest available iso, available lenses) 3) understand that smaller sensor systems typically only provide subsets of what is possible...

Now I hope DPR will perform some tests using equivalent settings, it should be interesting, to go beyond the obvious "FF less noisy and crop sharp from wide open" and look for some real differences...

Hey, thanks DM ! The best way to access the my writings is via the main page by the way. Cheers, Pieter

Here is a link to an on-line tutorial defending the use of equivalent settings when comparing systems, part of a set of tutorials I once wrote to explain things to friends who were overly anxious...

Yes indeed it is a better version !  Are you still thinking of some kind of 'Equivalence for dummies' tutorial ? At one point one just gets enough of the discussions and being an optimistic person...

At least they tried for a while. They would better publish some theory on this matter before using vague concepts like light-gathering. I hope this is what they are up to ! P.

Reminds me of my Nikon SQ - loved that camera !

I particularly like the graph on equivalent apertures. Some years late, but still : it's there (and I hope it's there to stay). Congratulations :-)

Yep, thanks, that helped me out :-)