>>4096267>In which case "lightweight raw files" are a non issue.could be file storage costs for computer and cards, transfer speeds for high volume work, better for mobile workflow, etc
I don't know what their specific issue was, and I have higher res models, but I do know people that shoot D850's at reduced resolution for the above reasons
>So which is it champ, were you projecting your poverty insecurity i don't have any insecurity about my money / cameras, almost certainly have more than you anyways, but it's dumb to shame people over money, just as it's dumb to brag about it
>It's a straw man proving that smaller pixel pitch doesn't have a negative effect on noise by using objectively measured examplepicrel, theory is different than practice, and i agree in theory, just doesn't work out that way in reality
> that article showed that for a given lens increasing the megapixel count ALWAYS gave an increase in resolution,yeah, that's one take away for sure, system mtf rises as you increase lens quality or megapixel count
it also shows that the mtf benefit of higher megapixel sensors is very dependent on having a high quality lens
that is, an okay or good lens shows the 8k mtf pretty close to the lower resolutions, and you really only get the most out of it with an excellent lens, which was my initial point, sorry if that was not communicated truly
>you don't understand what "iso is arbitrary and set to a reference brightness" please enlighten me
to be clear if I (sorry don't have m43 at the moment)
>grab aps-c, ff and gfx cameras>use identical settings and lensesthen
>ff / gfx camera’s exposure is darkerif I go do this and prove you wrong, what do i win?
