This article should be read by everybody

Started Dec 12, 2013 | Discussions thread
Draek Senior Member • Posts: 2,028
Re: Why standardize on substandard resolution

K E Hoffman wrote:

And they were wrong.. much above 13x19 6MP starts to get soft and there was plenty of indications that Good Film was closer to 15 MP.. BTW I didn't even bother to drop in the Ken Rockwell article talking about Film being way higher than that.. Its an out liar version.

So they were correct when they're aligned with your thoughts, and wrong when they were not. Great way of conducting an argument.

Digital is better at higher ISO.. but I still think scaling to 8MP so you can lower the bar to match lower resolution cameras is silly.. DXO number IMHO have always been suspect. but we love numbers especially when they let is ignore our eyes.

High ISO? I was talking about DR.

Though your comment about numbers letting us ignore our eyes is interesting, considering most tests that put ~5-8 Mpx sensors as equal to 35mm use methodologies of "shoot, process, print, see how they compare", whereas most those which put it nearer to 14-16 Mpx, on which you're basing your whole argumentation, reach it through calculations based on line pairs and other criteria which has little to no relevance outside of shooting resolution charts in flat walls.

And we are back to DXO cooking and scaling RAW and in a process that has no transparencey but if you want to ignore your own eyes for proprietary number fine.. side by shots at TOP ISO so show a clear differences.

It's explained crystal clear in the article I linked to; not my or their fault if you can't understand it.

 Draek's gear list:Draek's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Samsung TL500 Canon PowerShot A1200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A390
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow