[Mpix Challenge] Megapixel resolution challenge

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
The purpose of this challenge is to see if general users like us can
discern that detail. The use of a fine print magazine advert at a good
distance is very useful for resolution testing as it presents contrast
lines at many angles (font shape).

I'd be happier to use USAF res charts, but they are expensive for their
limited use. The Economist is a few bucks at your local newsstand.

So is pretty pointless for anybody who actually uses their camera to shoot
real world subjects in real world conditions.
The "newspaper test" is very good at picking the difference between a crap
camera/lens and a good one. But offers little when comparing similar top end
camera's/lenses IMO.
Still, IF the results are spectacularly different, AND repeatable, I'm
prepared to eat my words I guess :-)

MrT.

David J Taylor wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
[]
8. EVALUATION

Evaluation: center and corner sharpness. Discussion of results
in rec.photo.equipment.slr-systems.

Excuse me, but if you are evaluating digital SLR systems, please
discuss the results in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems!

Film shooters are just as welcome to participate.

See rule 1 b) para 2.

Whatever, Alan. You won't see me participating in discussions in a
newsgroup I don't subscribe to. Digital belongs here.

Whatever, David.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Mr.T wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
The purpose of this challenge is to see if general users like us can
discern that detail. The use of a fine print magazine advert at a good
distance is very useful for resolution testing as it presents contrast
lines at many angles (font shape).

I'd be happier to use USAF res charts, but they are expensive for their
limited use. The Economist is a few bucks at your local newsstand.

So is pretty pointless for anybody who actually uses their camera to shoot
real world subjects in real world conditions.
The "newspaper test" is very good at picking the difference between a crap
camera/lens and a good one. But offers little when comparing similar top end
camera's/lenses IMO.
Still, IF the results are spectacularly different, AND repeatable, I'm
prepared to eat my words I guess :-)

I seem to have to repeat this a lot: The main point here is the
assumption by some that there is no useful difference between a 12 and
24 Mpix camera, not which top lens is best.

The first step is to see if that difference can be seen.

Given high quality lenses used on 12 and 24 Mpix sensors, I'm pretty
sure the difference will come out based on the sensor, not minor
differences in high end lens resolution.

So, are you in or out?


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:21:09 -0800 (PST), Noons wrote:
: On Dec 2, 9:03*am, Alan Browne
: wrote:
: Some claim that full frame sensors like the Sony a900's 24.6 Mpix or the
: Canon 21 Mpix cameras cannot out-resolve the Nikon 12 Mpix full frame
: cameras.
:
: I therefore throw out this friendly challenge with results to be posted
: (full frame raw images) in two weeks time.
: monster snip
:
:
: yaaaaawn

For once, I agree with Noons.

Bob

Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:21:09 -0800 (PST), Noons wrote:
: On Dec 2, 9:03 am, Alan Browne
: wrote:
: Some claim that full frame sensors like the Sony a900's 24.6 Mpix or the
: Canon 21 Mpix cameras cannot out-resolve the Nikon 12 Mpix full frame
: cameras.
:
: I therefore throw out this friendly challenge with results to be posted
: (full frame raw images) in two weeks time.
: monster snip
:
:
: yaaaaawn

For once, I agree with Noons.

Have a nice nap.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:38:30 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:
: David J Taylor wrote:
: Alan Browne wrote:
: []
: 8. EVALUATION
:
: Evaluation: center and corner sharpness. Discussion of results
: in rec.photo.equipment.slr-systems.
:
: Excuse me, but if you are evaluating digital SLR systems, please
: discuss the results in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems!
:
: Film shooters are just as welcome to participate.
:
: See rule 1 b) para 2.

I noticed that, and it puzzled me. How does the inclusion of film contribute
in any way to answering the question that motivated the exercise? Which, I
believe, was "Do you need more than 12 megapixels in a full-frame digital
sensor?"

Bob

On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:34:00 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

I noticed that, and it puzzled me. How does the inclusion of film contribute
in any way to answering the question that motivated the exercise? Which, I
believe, was "Do you need more than 12 megapixels in a full-frame digital
sensor?"

One possible reason could be that he wants to make sure that
people that know him are aware of his new toy!

Robert Coe wrote:

I noticed that, and it puzzled me. How does the inclusion of film contribute
in any way to answering the question that motivated the exercise? Which, I
believe, was "Do you need more than 12 megapixels in a full-frame digital
sensor?"

Some very high resolution films should out-resolve 20 megapixels
on a 24x36 format. I have no film scanner, but I might be prepared
to do the test with Eastman 5360 if someone will accept my film.

Peter.
--

Peter Irwin wrote:
Robert Coe wrote:
I noticed that, and it puzzled me. How does the inclusion of film contribute
in any way to answering the question that motivated the exercise? Which, I
believe, was "Do you need more than 12 megapixels in a full-frame digital
sensor?"

Some very high resolution films should out-resolve 20 megapixels
on a 24x36 format. I have no film scanner, but I might be prepared
to do the test with Eastman 5360 if someone will accept my film.

Peter.

Send me a valid e-mail and I'll send you a mailing address. Remove the
'freelunch'.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

David J Taylor wrote:

Alan, as you are comparing DSLRs, or so it seems to me, to discuss the
results in what many regard as a film group, seems odd, to say the
least. I hope you will at least convey a summary report to this group.

If you're trying to resurrect the very dead "rpe35mm is for film only
argument", don't bother.

Not only are the charters sensor neutral, the FF cameras discussed are
identical in all other ways to 35mm film slr's.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.