bclaff

We may be wandering off topic since this is not the astrophotography forum :-) You may want to look a Input-referred Read Noise rather than Read Noise in DNs. If you click on cameras in the legend ...

Just to add; as an approximation, especially if magnification is small, you can assume distance = focal length / magnification. So, in the above example, if focal length were 300mm and ...

See if you can find a calculator that uses magnification instead of focal length and distance (I'll see if I can find mine). I think it's much easier for me to judge magnification than distance. Fo ...

This nearly flat line indicates that the sensor is ISO In-variant: As I stated in the original post, and as is evident by the Read Noise in DNs : The X-T100 does not have dual conversion gain so it ...

Yeah, the visualizations look like this : Best viewed "Original Size" The numeric metrics are also quite close. No visible Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN).

Yeah. I do 2D Fourier transforms to test for things like noise reduction and see none with the PEN-F. (Note I corrected the site URL above to .net) If these are dark areas in a low ISO image then ...

A little behind some other recent models but pretty good performance: Note that this is not a dual conversion gain sensor. I'm always looking to add more measurements here's what I have/don't have. ...

Regardless of shutter mode the ILCE-6500 has horizontal Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN) in both black and illuminated frames: Best viewed "Original Size" False colors are to make patterns more obvious. A ...

My thinking too. Very regular and centered. Regards

Well, I'm puzzled; I frequently edit post with images (using the Rich Text Editor) and never lose them.

But that 1m depth of field is not symmetrical about 5m (assuming that's perfect focus). So depth of focus helps us intuit depth of field but the actual results are different. Regards

Yeah, I transposed! ISO 2730 is where it crosses 6.50 :-) -- Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )

The DC-G9has a Low Light ISO at PhotonsToPhotos of ISO 2073 which is where the Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) crosses 6.5 on this chart : YMMV

In terms of Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) there is no significant difference. (Except that the X-T3 goes down to ISO 160 which has increased PDR). People do see to report seeing a bit more ...

Yes; as you say a DxO Labs invention. And yes; at PhotonsToPhotos the first section are measurements performed specifically for the site, and the second section are measurements regurgitated from ...

As I understand your question there is no easy answer without knowing more about the specific lenses. When you reverse a lens you reverse the front and rear principal planes. The increased distance ...

No just making the (important) distinction between depth of focus (what you show) and depth of field (which I was showing); there is a (subtle?) difference. Regards,

Sure. But what's the x-axis? Regards

Looks like you have depth of focus rather than depth of field; right? (They aren't quite the same, for example depth of focus is symmetrical.) Regards

Yeah, no one with an A7SM2 has gotten in touch with me to coordinate testing.