16mp vs 20mp, AA filter comp

AdamT wrote:

rashid7 wrote:

Albert, I'm blown away by how very much sharper the GX85 was. I have to wonder what is going on here! Thanks for posting

JPGs aren`t very good for testing across generations of cameras, what you`l be seeing more is the difference between the JPG engines

I found the G5 has a very weak AA filter , it`s almost as sharp as the GX80 (which has none) and sharper at pixel level than the GX8 , the actual filter maybe the same but the GX8 has a tighter pixel pitch of course ...... when comparing JPGs between the G5 and GX80 I see much the same as you`re seeing above , G

Likely GX7 has the same spec of the sensor of G5(?), so you saw similar result?

much sharper most if its down to the Cruder NR and sharpening of the older cameras JPGs.

Both of these samples were using the default setting of Vivid photo style at NR=0.

I found the GX7 to be critically sharp in RAW in capture one

If RAW is considered, there could have more factors other than the camera been involved. Besides the RAW software, skill on RAW conversion is also a major factor which can affect the outcome.

In fact, jpg is not entirely not editable. Sharpening on the jpg from GX7 in PP could rival the SOOC jpg of GX85.

Therefore I looked for SOOC samples to compare in order to minimize any non in-camera factors.

in E-Shutter mode - OK the extra mega fine detail was better in the GX80 but it`s far smaller a difference than between the two JPG engines

I agreed that the samples here could not fully tell the story. I always find closer range shooting with more fine detail, e.g. close up image on flower etc, should better be used. However I do not have the sort of photos, non edited, and in similar shooting condition from both cameras. 😞

Just my findings anyway

Thank you for looking at them.

-- hide signature --

** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **