It is a beautiful.
Are you saing that MFT will be tested at 50+MP?
I think the short answer is... it is complicated! I had to look it up as I've not looked at it before in detail. So there are two sets of 4 pixel shifts. Each set of 4 overcomes the biggest flaw of bayer pattern and you get individual RGB sampling at each location.
The second set of 4 is where it gets more complicated. These are diagonally centred between the first 4, so the question then is how much benefit does that give? It wont quite give a complete doubling on X and Y axis, but if you rotate 45 degrees, you could argue it doubles the sampling rate on diagonals.
This is likely further complicated by the usable area of each detection site. We imagine these as being perfect squares, but chances are they're not. We generally like them as big as possible for maximum light collection potential, but this half-shift would result in significant overlaps and you wont get the full benefit. If they were smaller it could help with resolving, at the cost of less sensitivity.
I think we're in a similar situation to when Foveon first came out. Just how do you compare? In reality there probably isn't a single number improvement that represents all situations, but there is some improvement regardless.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
Interesting point - actually I didn't really think about the potential increase in resolution.
While this could be an interesting exercise, I will stick to 16mp for the mainstream testing.
Hi Klaus,
You woudn't have used the "Hi-Rez" option anyway!
There are a few things, that one can easily miss when reading the text:
#1 cite: "special ‘High-Res Shot’ option that is said to deliver resolution equivalent to a 40 Megapixel"
#2 cite: "sensor by combining 8 shots into a single JPEG using sensor shift"
ok ... so ... if an old EOS 300D is said to deliver 100 Megapixel ... we would certainly doubt this information.
but if Oly mentions such a vague phrase, we applaud?
Also ... would you use JPG as a base for MTF measurement?
Just some thoughts ... Rainer
PZ uses software to optimize the sharpening for each lens+sensor combination, then feeds a RAW+sharpening conversion as a TIFF into Imatest, as imatest cannot read raws.
Lenstip converts to raw without any sharpening, and sample images are out of camera JPEGs with sharpening turned off.
Normally 'test' body upgrades only occur when the sensor resolution increase. The 'trick' by the em5ii doesn't really test lens resolution as it 'fakes' the resolution increase by taking multiple frames and merging them together.