05-20-2012, 06:49 PM
OK...But how can you explain that lens lost 200-250 LW/PH at the borders at sensor with 16 MP? It's 16 MP sensor of K-5 with max. resolution 2750 LW/PH vs 2350 LW/PH. Let's allow that your sample has bad corners and AA filter affects at corner resolution of FA43....
BUT....if the resolution was 1993 LW/PH at 10 MP, it couldn't be 1743 LW/PH at 16 MP camera.
250 LW/PH drop at the system with 400 LW/PH higher max. resolution. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />
All lenses retested at K-5 have better resolution than at K10D. And it's no surprise. Even FA31/1.8 if we say about film era optical design.
Except for FA43's corners. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
BUT....if the resolution was 1993 LW/PH at 10 MP, it couldn't be 1743 LW/PH at 16 MP camera.
250 LW/PH drop at the system with 400 LW/PH higher max. resolution. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />
All lenses retested at K-5 have better resolution than at K10D. And it's no surprise. Even FA31/1.8 if we say about film era optical design.
Except for FA43's corners. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />