11-30-2010, 11:41 PM
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1291158324' post='4616']
but that what it's trying to say could be rather interesting. Or did I misunderstand everything?
[/quote]
It's interesting... just like any other piece of science fiction <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1291158324' post='4616']
DxO still inks to this article and what I could find in the LL forum wasn't really saying anything else than "no explanation". Care to enlighten me? [/quote]
The main problem with this article is they're trying to make big claims with limited and possibly badly conducted tests.
There's no doubt that there's light loss due to light entering the photosites from an angle but they're trying to prove this through a methodology that they're hiding. It's a really difficult thing to measure, especially because stopping a lens down reduces optical vignetting that reduces the transmission difference between center and borders. This effect interferes with what they're trying to measure at the sensor level, simply put.
At any rate, a slower aperture doesn't mean there's more (total) light gathered. In fact, I think this whole manufacturers boosting the ISO thing at large apertures is pure fairytale-grade speculation. That can be easily tested for though... I might actually do that sometime soon, now that I think about it.
GTW
but that what it's trying to say could be rather interesting. Or did I misunderstand everything?
[/quote]
It's interesting... just like any other piece of science fiction <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> [quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1291158324' post='4616']
DxO still inks to this article and what I could find in the LL forum wasn't really saying anything else than "no explanation". Care to enlighten me? [/quote]
The main problem with this article is they're trying to make big claims with limited and possibly badly conducted tests.
There's no doubt that there's light loss due to light entering the photosites from an angle but they're trying to prove this through a methodology that they're hiding. It's a really difficult thing to measure, especially because stopping a lens down reduces optical vignetting that reduces the transmission difference between center and borders. This effect interferes with what they're trying to measure at the sensor level, simply put.
At any rate, a slower aperture doesn't mean there's more (total) light gathered. In fact, I think this whole manufacturers boosting the ISO thing at large apertures is pure fairytale-grade speculation. That can be easily tested for though... I might actually do that sometime soon, now that I think about it.
GTW