FZ200 Diffraction Limit - Panasonic Tech Service

Started Aug 27, 2013 | Discussions thread
Stephen Barrett Contributing Member • Posts: 683
Does the Panasonic FZ50 violate the laws of Physics?

Detail Man wrote:

Stephen Barrett wrote:

Something is wrong with my last post. The test result of 1.3 pixels per line-pair for the FZ50 doesn't make sense. Either the test is too good or I blundered in my calculation. Too bad i have to go out now. It's going to drive me nuts.

Two photosites cannot be enough - simply because of the spatial frequency spectrum of periodic line-pairs (a "square wave" containing higher order harmonics as well as a fundamental spatial frequency), the Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem, and the random-phase of aligning projected periodic line-pairs onto an image-sensors array of photosite locations. It's that simple.

DM ...

Thanks Detail Man.
That is the reason that I said something was wrong with my previous post.
The question is:
How can you explain J C Brown's and Cameralab's test results?
By my calculations in my previous post, they seem to be resolving above the Nyquist freqency.
Cameralabs claims a resolution of 2100 line pairs per picture height for the Panasonic FZ50. The sensor height has 2737 pixels ==> 1.3 pixels per line-pair, so how do they get that resolution? If you click on the Cameralabs link that I posted, you can see the evidence. Also J C Brown's test is similar, claiming slightly less resolution, corresponding to 1.5 pixels per line-pair. So, what is going on? Did I drop a factor of 2 somewhere? Or, does the Panasonic FZ50 sensor violate the laws of physics to get twice the resolution of the sensor in my Canon SX30?

 Stephen Barrett's gear list:Stephen Barrett's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX30 IS +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow