Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Ah, but how do you define twice the size . . . twice the length, or twice the area?I'm going to guess that DP2 Merrill will produce prints approaching twice the size of RX100 prints for similar quality.
G.
Ah, but how do you define twice the size . . . twice the length, or twice the area?
Hi Jono,
'If two is the half of three what's the half of four.'
The harbour master in Jersey apparently doodled on this question with my Dad in about 1925. Unfortunately his workings out have been lost in the mists of time.
Do I ever know what I MEAN??
I think I meant twice the length, or was it twice the area, my brain keeps buffering up!
I always liked the old Leonard Cohen poem.
"People who eat meat like to get their teeth into something,
People who don't eat meat like to get their teeth into something else,
If these thoughts interest you, even for a moment,
You are lost".
Cheers,
Gandolfi.
ps. Call that a poem? Doesn't even rhyme!
allow me to say some silly words.:ROTFL:
Thorkil,
You say as many silly words as you like.
Your musings are always interesting and amusing:thumbup:
Cheers,
Gandolfi.
Thank you very much Gandolfi, sometimes one stick the head out, and then regretallow me to say some silly words.:ROTFL:
Thorkil,
You say as many silly words as you like.
Your musings are always interesting and amusing:thumbup:
Cheers,
Gandolfi.
Thank you for the pictures Quentin! allthough my eye just also looking for the "normal" colours above and besides her reed hair, to see the shine from the DP!
Thorkil
Great stuff - do throw the RX100 into the mix - it may lose, but I'd like to see by how much. . . . and if you have an OMD with a suitable lens!I have done my first very, very rough test bewteen a NEX-7 with Zeiss 24mm lens and the Sigma DP2M, both at F3.2 and 100ISO, all sharpening turned of in Sigma Photo Pro, default settings for the NEX-7 in ACR, Sigma rezzed up to the exact same size as the NEX-7 file using standard Photoshop resizing and I would say it is very close, with perhaps the edge to the DP2M. Not a proper test so I won't publish the pics but will try a publishable comparison soon.
I think you and I are saying the same thing here That's why I gave a range on the resolution and why I mentioned the colors.Raist
That's the theory, but its not a linear comparison, because there are differences other than resolution to consider. My expectation (and broadly my "findings") has been around 2x, so roughly 30mp. But its not an exact science and modern mosaic or bayer sensors are excellent. The one thing my test is not is scientific!
I will redo the test today and upload something for the general amusement of all.
Could the comparison (NEX-7) better done at f/5.6 instead of f/8? Why go way past the diffraction?OK, now check for yourselves ...warning: all very large files, saved as jpegs at quality 11. Adobe RGB so may looked washed out.
Sigma DP2M uprezzed in Photoshop using Bicubic Automatic to 6000x4000, 100ISO, F8, tripod mounted, all sharpening turned off.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9806585/Sigma%20DPM2_6000x4000.jpg
Second, the same shot as above, but using the default sharpening settings in Sigma Photo Pro and all NR turned off
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9806585/Sigma%20DPM2_6000x4000-sharpened-when-decoded.jpg
Finally, NEX-7 at native resolution, Zeiss 24mm lens, slightly closer to subject to compensate for wider angle lens, tripod, decoded in Camera raw, PS6, at default settings.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9806585/NEX-7_native_resolution.jpg
Look at the fine wire mesh in the glass in the roof to the right of the chimney stack, which I think it quite revealing.
That, my dear Vivek, is why these comparisons are always contentious and also why I dont usually do them. Whose to say the same is not true of the DP2M? There is no science here.....Could the comparison (NEX-7) better done at f/5.6 instead of f/8? Why go way past the diffraction?