>>4228940Considering olympus also labels ISO off by a full stop, I would be on massive amounts of cheating.
If it's not open source software you have no clue what base hardware performance is, and comparing raws is totally invalid. You can only guess that if someone seems to be violating the laws of physics and creating perfect or better than perfect sensors, despite all using the hardware sony uses and sells everyone else, they're just duping you
Does the fujifilm x-t4 have a perfect sensor? No, ISO 100 on fuji is ISO 40, although xtrans has a fake DR advantage because luminance noise is dominant at the cost of lost color data
>APS-C mount!Once again
I AM A LONDON EDUCATED COLLEGE GRAD WITH MULTIPLE ENGINEERING MASTERS.
I CAN TELL YOU, WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY, THAT THE MOUNT ONLY AFFECTS FOCUS BREATHING DUE TO INCIDENCE ANGLES AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS A NOTHINGBURGER
AND THE M11 DOESNT DO MUCH BETTER DESPITE A "CORRECTLY SIZED" MOUNT
BECAUSE LEICA DIDNT CHEAT ISO OR BAKE IN NR
TAKE THESE OTHER CAMERAS AND BUMP THE NR SLIDERS UP A TINY BIT
WOW IT LOOKS THE SAME NOW
BECAUSE THATS WHAT PANASONIC DID BEFORE THE RAW WAS EVER CONVERTED TO A JPEG
AND WHAT OLYMPUS ALSO DOES
BECAUSE OTHERWISE NO ONE WOULD BUY A CAMERA THAT SHITS OUT SUCH NOISY FILES
IT IS NOT PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE FOR A CAMERA TO EXCEED OR EQUAL THE IDEAL DR OF ITS SENSOR SIZE. NADA. THE ISO SETTING DOES NOT REFLECT REAL ISO, UNDETECTED NR WAS USED, OR BOTH. PERIOD.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
