So the quick story behind this is that I got my A7R2 and now thinking that it's possible I could replace my IQ180 if there wasn't that much drop-off in the IQ of the final prints.
I'm planning on taking some real shots and doing real prints, but this was a quick monitor viewing up-res comparison to see what it spits out.
The exact same shot was taken with an IQ180 and 80mm LS lens, and an A7R2 with the 55mm 1.8. The IQ180 was at F11, and the A7R2 at F8. All of the necessary focus and stabilization methods were followed to ensure optimum sharpness.
Here's the original full comp:
Here's the A7R2 100% crop, RAW conversion in C1, no processing.
Here's the A7R2 100% crop, UP-Res'd in PS to match the IQ180 size, Un-Sharp Mask at 100%.
Here's the IQ180 100% crop, Raw conversion in C1, no processing.
As expected, the microcontrast from the IQ180 is clearly evident, the A7R2 just can't compete. Right away you can see so much texture in the rose that are simply non-existent in the A7R2. However, at more than 2x the sensor size, and 2x the MP, for the overall IQ of the subject and important details, I think it's very close. In the end my main concern is prints, also up-res'ing vs lower DPI is a whole other story, but I think the differences should be even less evident on print.
But I've already started thinking, well if I can up-res the A7R2, imagine how much I can up-res the IQ180 then.
So I'd like to hear your guys thoughts, it's not the best method of testing but it was the simplest to get a quick idea. Maybe you guys have comments on how I can make more accurate assessments with other quick steps in the process?