Yes, of course the F65 sensor is bayer too and actually the low pass is stronger that i would like to see in that camera.
About the fact that the pixels are no co-sited you have a point.
What it bugs me is why every manufacturer makes so much effort to "hide" the numbers inside "tricky" statements instead of create confidence opening their specifications.
Is the same as when i hear most of the politicians, i wonder...why in the hell they don't say the whole story? Don't they realize that we would trust them much more and because of that we would follow them?
It is like the industry is afraid on showing their so called "flaws". There are no flaws, there are characteristics. I wouldn't use a Mercedes cabriolet to carry bricks and dirt...am i wrong?
The de-bayering algorithms are the key to the final results. They are designed to accommodate the characteristics of the OLPF, angle of the bayer mask, layout of filters (RGB), etc.
Whatever combination of physical factors exist, the algorithm interprets those values to create the resulting RGB image. It is the characteristics of that derived image that matter.
It can be interesting and valuable to know the physics of the process when pushing the electro-optical system. That said, if the derived image can resolve "x" lines on a zone plate then they are in fact resolved, however you got there.
Cheers - #19
Note: If you doubt the power of algorithms in creating images let me cite an example. NASA sent up a space telescope that had a serious focus problem (mirror surface flaw IIRC) and came back with literally millions of soft focus images. By characterizing the error they were able to create an algorithm that actually yielded more resolution that they could have achieved had the original image been in sharp focus. Impossible you say, au contraire, because they were able to reference just how much out of focus an item should be vs how it was represented they could create a more gradual and therefore more granular interpretation. God I love math ;-)
The only reason f65 is cheap now is because red epic is cheap. Did not know that they are only 65k now... Last time I was offered one from my Sony dealer was 105k. Well its good to see finally they are trying to be competitive.
The f23 & f35 were over 200k each both gathered dust about 12 month after release. I have Freinds with rental companies with these two bodies sitting on shelves never been looked at in years. Nobody remembers being ripped off by Sony for all those years and never re-cooped there investment.
I do think however the Sony f65 is a great camera. Wonderful pictures from it. But does not tick enough boxes for me. Not even close.
In the society we live in, when this is done by companies it's called salesmanship. When it's done by politicians, in almost all cases it's simply lying. So there is a difference.....
Remember how VHS won over Betamax.. The lessor quality of the two won the race.
Anyways..... Life goes on. All cameras a great. I love them all.
by your very definition the F23 and F35 are ripoffs. Not worth the price...
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|