09-23-2010, 12:08 PM
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1285243136' post='3155']
Working backwards, I'm with you on the last point. I'm not normally a pixel peeper and recognise "good enough", and think too many people lose sight of the bigger picture where it matters.
In the case of the SD1 sensor, we do have something very different from everything else. At a technology level, I want to know what possible level of improvements it can give in the best case, even if in practice it wont necessarily deliver that in every case. So pixel peeping is worth doing initially to see what it really delivers. If you do so, you need to make sure the rest of the system isn't the limiting factor hence the diffraction consideration.
[/quote]
I understand that, but yet:
The AA filter will only add to the softening already there, it will not "mask" it.
The diffraction softening that each pixel samples will be the same for both a Bayer CFA array sensor and a Foveon sensor. The Foveon pixels will never get more soft than the Bayer ones.
Working backwards, I'm with you on the last point. I'm not normally a pixel peeper and recognise "good enough", and think too many people lose sight of the bigger picture where it matters.
In the case of the SD1 sensor, we do have something very different from everything else. At a technology level, I want to know what possible level of improvements it can give in the best case, even if in practice it wont necessarily deliver that in every case. So pixel peeping is worth doing initially to see what it really delivers. If you do so, you need to make sure the rest of the system isn't the limiting factor hence the diffraction consideration.
[/quote]
I understand that, but yet:
The AA filter will only add to the softening already there, it will not "mask" it.
The diffraction softening that each pixel samples will be the same for both a Bayer CFA array sensor and a Foveon sensor. The Foveon pixels will never get more soft than the Bayer ones.