Last edited by Shahmatt; 23rd July 2010 at 10:10 AM.
Samsung NX10+30mm, Fuji S6500FD
TS, first of all thank you for sharin the article, but someone did share the same article
Still don't get it.
It would be more convincing if he can produce visible results for everyone to verify.
Seeing is believing.
Back to topic: the article deals with an abstraction: Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) which is compared between different sensors. In addition, to make comparisons possible, normalization is used (involving some Maths). How do you think this can be shown in pictures? The usual "100% crop" won't help here.
Secondly, when only looking at numbers, one thing is missing to me: At which level (difference in points or %) will the difference become visible to human eye under certain conditions? When testing sensors there is this remark that differences below 5 points are not visible to human eye (I suspect it's meant as "trained human eye" and consumers might only notice something at 10 points and more..).
i am the one who shared it there, but ts here did a better job than me.. haha
anyway, this article is enlightening.. at least to me... anyway what i learnt from it is we should compare pic at the same size when evaluating cameras with different resolution... and not at 100%...
anyway, numbers are not important for me, i will just choose a size, say 4 R, and evaluate camera base on that... simple is good....
I think a good gauge is to compare the results (same size) in final prints, that's what a photo is for. After all, whatever theory that is being used for the comparison has to be put into practical form for everyone to see. Isn't it?