the moire trade-off (answering rriley)

Started May 31, 2011 | Discussions thread
Flat view
rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,637
the moire trade-off (answering rriley)

Sorry, I wanted to answer Rriley from the maxed out thread.

rovingtim wrote:

He has used Nikon since 2008 and Nikon has been using weak AA's since the D70 so he is well aware of the effects of a weak AA and wanted to discuss it here because its new for Oly users and they have a direct comparison in the E3 (which this forum declared as sharp before the E5 came out).

I'm also interested. I'm also curious why no one is talking about the huge reversal of Oly's camera design philosophy that the E5 represents (optically correct everything for superior IQ).

Rriley said:

since for whatever reason you need it spelled out AGAIN

having less intrusive AA filter means more detail gets beyond the lenses to the imaging engine be-it RAW or jpeg. MTF scores are significantly higher than E3 which did not have the same technology, without that technology to deal with instances of moire in the jpeg shooting regime would be unacceptable to Olympus IMO.

is the overall package of E5 better than E3, yes

case closed

So, are you saying that, when building their E3 pro camera, that Oly chose an strong AA and deprived their professional users (those who prefer to work from RAW) of competitive detail just in case moire showed up in jpg? Do you think this had anything to do with their failure in the pro market?

If you develop E5 files using ACR defaults, they are as sharp as 12mp D3 files. That means that Oly has just caught up to the weak AA brigade.

All that lost business just to prevent the rare (I'm told) moire from showing up in jpg ... are you sure? Same with the E420, the E520, the E620 ...

Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow