Michel Aristegui

What I said earlier can be put quite simply. If you want to compare two sensors, full frame and APS-C, with the same pixel count, you have to measure spatial frequency in cycles per pixel, not in ...

It's possible that we argue ad infinitum. But this is because you don't reply to my post, which I reproduce below. Please comment on what I'm saying. Find a flaw in my reasoning. It's up to you!

If you crop the full frame image to APS-C size and if you look at the image at 1:1, the pixels will of course be the same! But when you print the images to a specified format, you will have to ...

The sharpness of a lens depends on its modulation transfer function. For any spatial frequency the MTF gives the fraction of contrast transmitted by the lens. Now suppose that the MTF of the lens ...

I think you didn't understand my point. Of course 'sharpness is a function of lens design and build'. But the same 24-105 will be much better on full frame than on APS-C. If both sensors have the ...

The 18-35 should be sharper than the 24-105 on an APS-C body! If not, why design APS-C lenses? In my opinion, using full frame lenses on APS-C bodies is  a waste. Very approximately, you divide ...

Personally I never experienced any AF problems with any cameras. Certainly because I never asked too much of them. A few years ago a friend of mine told me that his Nikon D90 was not very good at ...

I wasn't really expecting an explanation. I just wanted to point out that, although you find people here nastier than ever, many of your posts, past and present, are offensive in some way, for no ...

Please explain.

Don't you think this reply to someone who didn't attack you in any way adds to the 'nasty' nature of this forum?

It's always a pleasure to read a post from someone who has interesting things to say. Thank you very much.

Truth is often funny. You begin with the lens and you end with the print. The only way to judge the quality of a camera is the last step, the print. A0 is probably nice, but exceptional A2 print ...

Perfect. This is the kind of information I'm looking for!

I could agree with your suggestion. But if a reasonable number of SD Quatro owners made big prints and told me here their impressions,  I think I could have a reasonably reliable idea of the ...

I can't see the point of the reference to a mobile camera. It might be because I never take pictures with my phone. On one hand, as I'm lucky to know some mathematics, I can predict the apperance ...

I find that my DP2M yields exceptional print quality, to my eyes visibly better than my Sony A7. I'm not really interested in a comparison between Merrill and Quattro. I'd simply like to know if ...

From the start it's clear that any different opinion won't be welcome. Nevertheless I'd like to stress that, for many people, a picture comes into existence when it's printed. And I really would ...

We should never see this kind of argument, which usually comes from someone whose only asset is to be young.

I'm surprised that nobody here uses the DxOMark site to compare lenses. You choose a lens and a camera and you go to 'measurements', 'sharpness', 'field map', and you SEE the sharpness of the lens ...

But A5 is twice as big as A7.