Rockwell proves I am not mad

PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,845Member
edited November 2015 in General Discussions
A while back whilst experimenting with my new Sigma 150-500mm I found that bird pictures were or looked sharper at 6mp rather than 24 ( D7100)
No one could tell me why except that I was wrong (mad) but Mr Rockwell today(11.11.15) conducting tests explained that using the sensor at about 1/4 of its native resolution cancells the effect of the Bayer filter and it looks sharper.
Towards the bottom in the 12MP =12MP.

And you and I thought I was mad.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2015-11-02-apple-canon-fuji-sony/index.htm
Post edited by Pistnbroke on

Comments

  • kenadamskenadams Posts: 222Member
    "BREAKING NEWS: Images sharper after using the sharpening tool!"

    Seriously, IMO this is just like saying that the D700 is sharper than the D810, and that Nikon dropped the ball on this.. and does that now mean that the 50MP 5Dsr downsampled to 12MP is the world's greatest downsampled camera?


    "This downsampling ratio (50 to 12 MP) eliminates all Bayer interpolation, which is a completely different softening effect than anti-alias filtering." - if Bayer interpolation is eliminated .. shouldn't the image be in black and white?? *sigh*
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    12MP at 12MP is not as sharp as >12 at 12MP ... err ..I always knew this. dont we all know this ?
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • PapermanPaperman Posts: 468Member
    edited November 2015
    A while back whilst experimenting with my new Sigma 150-500mm I found that bird pictures were or looked sharper at 6mp rather than 24 ( D7100)
    You are aware this is not exactly what KR is trying to say , right Pistnbroke ? ;)
    Post edited by Paperman on
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    Downsampling 36mp to 12mp has been successful for me in high ISO / noise situations. Images are cleaner and sharper than either de-noised 36mp or native 12mp.

    ... H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,845Member
    Thanks haroldp ..I was just looking for an explanation of what I found ,,not sure if I found it ....oh photography is such fun.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    edited November 2015
    Thanks haroldp ..I was just looking for an explanation of what I found ,,not sure if I found it ....oh photography is such fun.
    Didn't we have a thread on this mystery of yours? I am still curious as to why it is. I was hoping to see a resolution to this as I know you are rather tenacious @Pistnbroke

    Maybe we should revive that thread ... I don't remember what it was called :-) as you probably had a nice creative title LOL :-)

    As to what KR was saying .. it is true of course 12MP is actually 3 MP with Bayer Math magic added to increase resolution to maybe 4-5 MP "smeared" into 12MP.. add to that the AA filter which smears it differently .. however I think since its only 4 MP to start with anyway the AA smearing really doesn't make much of a difference. (detail wise)

    Now these days we have 24MP DX with no AA filter. so it really is only 6 MP "Bayered" to maybe 8MP of detail. If you down sample the 24MP to 12 MP you still have the intrinsic 8MP of detail. Whereas if you look at a 12MP DX sensor with AA you only have 3-4MP of intrinsic detail. But of course we all knew this right ?

    as a bit of an aside .. there has been maths recently developed by the smart people at various universities that has improved on the regular Bayer method. From what I have seen they use not just the 4 (rggb) "Bayer" pixels but groups of larger than 4 say 5,7,9,12 to make the calculations resulting in truer colors and more resolution and no need for AA.. maybe some of it is in the new Expeed processors .. probably maybe not and it will be implemented soon so we probably can expect more boosts in resolution in the next few EXPEED generations.


    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • PapermanPaperman Posts: 468Member
    edited November 2015
    Guys, KR is just saying a downsized 12 Mp from 24 or 50Mp is better than a 12 Mp from a 12 Mp camera.

    Nowhere does he say, one gets better sharpness/resolution at lower Mp than higher Mp ( in same camera ). The comparasion is between cameras, not between images at different Mps from same camera.

    He explains the reasoning behind it - that's all ... Does not say the 12 Mp image has more sharpness/details than the 50Mp one.
    Post edited by Paperman on
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    Thanks haroldp ..I was just looking for an explanation of what I found ,,not sure if I found it ....oh photography is such fun.
    Didn't we have a thread on this mystery of yours? I am still curious as to why it is. I was hoping to see a resolution to this as I know you are rather tenacious @Pistnbroke

    Maybe we should revive that thread ... I don't remember what it was called :-) as you probably had a nice creative title LOL :-)
    http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/4684/is-rockwell-right-or-am-i-mad
  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 1,845Member
    oops sorry I repeated myself ..well almost ....like I said did not get and still dont have a full answer to my original question...
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    One possible answer: you are mad :-)
    If you put some photos up on Dropbox I can show you how to post them here and we can examine the depths of your madness in detail ;)
    Just PM me
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,000Member
    One possible answer: you are mad :-)
    LOL. I read the Rockwell article and its conclusions are not justified. What is really needed is for the sensors to all have the same size. Comparing a full frame sensor downsized versus much smaller sensors is not really helpful for the Bayer filter argument. Why not shoot a 12mp full frame versus other higher resolution ones downsampled to be able to isolate the effects of the filter? Or just compare it to the sigma fovean?
    Anyway the one take away I got from that article is obvious, in that you can't really view the pics from cell phones at 100% and expect DSLR level of sharpness.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,055Member
    One possible answer: you are mad :-)
    If you put some photos up on Dropbox I can show you how to post them here and we can examine the depths of your madness in detail ;)
    Just PM me
    Priceless!
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    Even If you are paranoid, it does not mean that they are not out to get you.

    Paranoids of the world unite .... if you dare.


    ..... H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    Its a conspiracy to get you all together in one place .. I tell you !
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

Sign In or Register to comment.