Gatorguy
Member
I don't disagree that in the example you showed, it is not.
That specific example is at odds with similar chart tests done by my technician. That specific sample also does not entirely agree with results reported by some other companies doing debayering. I do know for certainty that in some edge cases, the samples posted by DPR were flawed, not representative of what owners should expect. Firmware versions at the time of testing and/or choices of lenses used for the images may not have been the best. I don't know how the Iridient raw converter reportedly used by DPR compares to what we use, or what limitations it may have, if any, with certain cameras, especially those with non-standard sensors. I've seen mention that Iridient has to open in RGB first before converting back to monochrome. Avoiding the demosaic process altogether, Monochrome2DNG in my case, is essential for best results.
From the few comparisons of image captures by my color K-1 compared to my monochrome K-1 I see an obvious slant in favor of the debayered one in many of them. Not all, but dependent on the scene and lighting and choice of raw processor, it can be very apparent. But that may not be fair since when I shoot with a monochrome camera it's with a different mindset. I search scenes for their monochrome potential and not the color elements.
It's not unlike comparing a high-res pixel shift image to a standard one taken by your own camera or mine; It's not always so clear that one is supposedly four (3?) times better resolved than the other unless you've successfully captured the shot with that intent, a big reason why I don't often bother, nor do most of the guys I know with pixel-shift capable cameras. Much of the time no one can tell any difference. But when the stars align, it's obvious to you that it works isn't it?
Your Panny capturing the full-color value in every pixel using high-res mode is not unlike my K1, or any other dedicated monochrome, capturing the full luminance value in every pixel using essentially always-on high-res mode, right?
Anyway, you asked how i came up with 80mp and I explained it, right or wrong. But now we're straying into attempts to establish quantifiable specifications and getting away from simply enjoying our monochrome cameras for what they are and what they capture. Done correctly I can see the very obvious and significant improvement in fine detail and tonality even if another viewer of my downsized for the web images can't. Maybe we can we just enjoy our monochrome photography and the discussions about it instead of worrying over degrees of resolution.
That specific example is at odds with similar chart tests done by my technician. That specific sample also does not entirely agree with results reported by some other companies doing debayering. I do know for certainty that in some edge cases, the samples posted by DPR were flawed, not representative of what owners should expect. Firmware versions at the time of testing and/or choices of lenses used for the images may not have been the best. I don't know how the Iridient raw converter reportedly used by DPR compares to what we use, or what limitations it may have, if any, with certain cameras, especially those with non-standard sensors. I've seen mention that Iridient has to open in RGB first before converting back to monochrome. Avoiding the demosaic process altogether, Monochrome2DNG in my case, is essential for best results.
From the few comparisons of image captures by my color K-1 compared to my monochrome K-1 I see an obvious slant in favor of the debayered one in many of them. Not all, but dependent on the scene and lighting and choice of raw processor, it can be very apparent. But that may not be fair since when I shoot with a monochrome camera it's with a different mindset. I search scenes for their monochrome potential and not the color elements.
It's not unlike comparing a high-res pixel shift image to a standard one taken by your own camera or mine; It's not always so clear that one is supposedly four (3?) times better resolved than the other unless you've successfully captured the shot with that intent, a big reason why I don't often bother, nor do most of the guys I know with pixel-shift capable cameras. Much of the time no one can tell any difference. But when the stars align, it's obvious to you that it works isn't it?
Your Panny capturing the full-color value in every pixel using high-res mode is not unlike my K1, or any other dedicated monochrome, capturing the full luminance value in every pixel using essentially always-on high-res mode, right?
Anyway, you asked how i came up with 80mp and I explained it, right or wrong. But now we're straying into attempts to establish quantifiable specifications and getting away from simply enjoying our monochrome cameras for what they are and what they capture. Done correctly I can see the very obvious and significant improvement in fine detail and tonality even if another viewer of my downsized for the web images can't. Maybe we can we just enjoy our monochrome photography and the discussions about it instead of worrying over degrees of resolution.
Last edited: