nnowak

A 20mp replacement for the G85 should be less than a year away, but I wouldn't discount the current 16mp sensor.  It is already better than the old 18mp Canon sensor.  Throw in IBIS and a handful ...

Not quite, compare the size and weight of the Fuji 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, and 56mm f1.2 to the Canon EF L 24mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, and 50mm f1.2.  The total weights are 892 grams vs 1990 grams, ...

All four of those cameras have IBIS.  Everything from Olympus has IBIS, and almost everything from Panasonic does now too.  Another year and the 20MP sensors should have filtered down to the rest ...

It is a pretty safe bet that m4/3 will get to 24MP long before Canon ever gets to 3 or 4 fast primes.  The m4/3 cameras are already midway through a transition to 20MP.

I know in the past, you had mentioned that video was a primary concern.  One thing to keep in mind when shooting video is that the minimum aperture (f5.6, f6.3) of a variable aperture lens is the ...

And here is the problem... If the M3 with 15-45mm is your bar for image quality, a newer RX100 will be 1/3-2/3 of a stop better for low light use.  The bright 1.8-2.8 lens on an RX100 more than ...

There are so many problems with these photos that it is impossible to make any sort of meaningful comparison between the two lenses. First off, the focus planes are in different locations. Your ...

What is the 50mm lens you were using for some of your shots?  The 50mm shots are a lot closer and with more magnification than anything from the 22mm or 28mm.

Not with those specifically, but yes for macro tubes in general.  If macro is only a very occasional use, or if you are trying to push the limits of magnification, then they are useful.  In ...

Define "macro" Closeups of pollen on the stamen, or shots of the entire flower? Your 22mm focuses down to 6 inches (measured from the sensor, not the front of the lens.  The 11-22mm also focuses ...

What on earth are you looking at, buddy?  The Pixel image is 8.2mp and the M5 is 15.5mp.

And now we get to the point where your math starts to fall apart... Measured lp/mm is independent of crop factor. Secondly, the lenstip testing is highly dependent on the camera used for testing. ...

I understand the point you are trying to make, but your math is way off.  Your resolution assumptions are only correct if all cameras are using the same lens, and that lens is resolution limited ...

Pretty sure Canon has shut down the old fab line that produced the 18MP sensor and 20MP DPAF sensor There is another possibility... Use the current 24mp DPAF sensor from the M5 and M6, but run it ...

No, I didn't.  Converted for equivalence it is only one stop faster than the Pixel.  It is also an angle of view that is easily attainable with good quality by cropping from the Pixel.

That is why I specifically mentioned the 15-45mm. The Pixel has an f8 equivalent aperture. The 15-45mm is f5.6-10 equivalent.  Add in stitching and cropping, and you can pretty easily match the ...

I don't think it is a matter of quantity, but quality. Industrial machine vision cameras the size of a typical compact have had multi object tracking for over a decade.

Resurrecting an old thread so you can reply to yourself via a second account?  Odd.

This may sound silly, but did you try using face tracking on your M6?  It can sometimes work really well for animals.

While it may be possible to create a technically better (less noise, more DR, more detail) image with the M5 compared to the Pixel, the key point is the level of effort involved. An M5 with 15-45mm ...