>>4228529>says it "outperforms"... shows this>despite comparing literally 11 megapixels to 25 the full frame camera still has more detail on the building even though the demosaicing algorithm is struggling to produce a smooth line from so few pixelsmoop was right
i like micro four thirds but this is pushing the boundaries of idiocy. its like yeah, do i want to see what the chrysler building actually looks like, or marvel at how crisp the few details didn't get raped by diffraction and noise reduction are?
the correct solutions here are to use a huger and more expensive lens for each camera, because if you doubled FF pixel density, and then reduced noise to match the G9 II's image, it would look exactly like micro four thirds here (maybe a little better, the 400mm S and 100-400 GM are world class lenses that are far beyond panaleica budget gear), or simply move closer to the building.
