>>3953417>but physicsYes anon, physics still exists, it's just not relevant with modern cameras in the way you're saying it is
>So what if they're using old technologyold technology is irrelevant anon
>you cherrypickedSays the guy that used an aps-c camera that's been proven to have incorrect measurements because fuji lie about iso, and also only including canon cameras, whereas I included a range of brands, from a range of generations
>If it wasn't a thing, then there'd just be 2 straight linesWhich there pretty much is, and they're hugging the ideal lines within 1/5th of a stop when over just 400 iso and even at their worst they don't fall over a stop off a perfect ideal, pic related. pic related also shows that the measurements for the x-pro 3 are unquestionably wrong. lmao.
