08-27-2016, 08:26 PM
I agree, would be nice indeed if possible.
Of course, just to make things more complex, I'd liek to se the difference between standard (in-body) processed jpegs and raws which are processed entirely netrally i fat all possible, i.e, some processign for any raw file, whatevr themake is. That would make for soem interestign comparisons I'd think. I do hope what will show in that case is what I always thought, considering Pentax, Fuji and Canon lenses, amongst others, and see what rendering differences there are caused by glass and coatings.
Kind regards, WIm
Of course, just to make things more complex, I'd liek to se the difference between standard (in-body) processed jpegs and raws which are processed entirely netrally i fat all possible, i.e, some processign for any raw file, whatevr themake is. That would make for soem interestign comparisons I'd think. I do hope what will show in that case is what I always thought, considering Pentax, Fuji and Canon lenses, amongst others, and see what rendering differences there are caused by glass and coatings.
Kind regards, WIm
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....