>>3982983>Compare them at equal resolution after resampling!That's even less in the canons favour, you dumbass.
>But you have to walk further away for it to be fair :'(Oh, is op looking to walk away from his subjects before taking them eh anon?
>10% contrast difference is relevantNo, it's not. Hence why optical limits and all the other lens review sites use mtf50.
>Out resolve implies this thing that literally no one usesLmao
>You're stupid for saying it needs 80lp\mm, when Nyquist says it needs to be more than 2x, not exactly 2x, so it needs 75 lp\mmOh anon, read this back a few times and realise how stupid you've been, let me help you, if Nyquist says it needs to be GREATER than 2x, would the required resolution be higher or lower? Lmfao.
>But lenses perform better stopped downThat page had figures from the lenses stopped down. Oh anon, your mind has really gone off the rails today.
>Look here's the very best lenses the largest lens rental company in the world could find, and 5 of them manage to outresolve a 24mp sensor in the centre!Lmfao, bit of another self own there chap
>More whining about mtf50 being wrongHuh, every reference I can find thinks mtf50 is the right one
Like
https://www.wildlifeinpixels.net/blog/sensor-resolution-and-lens-mtf/Who said "Hopefully you can now see that maybe measuring lens performance with reference to MTF 50 (50%, 0.5) rather than MTF 100 (100%, 1.0) might be a better idea."
And just to show how meaningless mtf10 is, see pic related, that's mtf100, mtf50 and mtf10
Go on, cry some more and make an idiot out of yourself some more.