>>3275056Are you really gonna argue that Bayer is not interpolation?
>There's no "controversy" because no one else makes the mistake you're making. Nobody makes the mistake *you* are making. Bayer filtration and interpolation is a well accepted compromise made out of necessity because we couldn't make photosites small enough to give adequate resolution with full colour capture.
Everybody understood that. When technology allowed, and because of the initial investment and R&D in Bayers, they realised it's easier to cram 30MP and view at 70% than do full colour capture at 20MP and view at 100%. And that's what they did.
But nobody claims that Bayer at 100% is as sharp as full colour capture at 100%.
Do you not realise that the mere existence of the AA filter as a concept and product is proof enough that Bayer has false colour/resolution issues at 100%?
Again, open a Foveon file and a Bayer file and view at 100%. Yu can compare with the file above, from a 5MP DP1.
>Foveon remains a tiny niche because their claims are hyperbole.No, it remains a niche because only a single, underdog manufacturer has access to it and the only cameras it's available at are fixed lens crop size point and shoots. And also high ISO is shit by digital's standards.
> Foveon isn't really sharper than AA-less Bayer sensors.There's no hope for you if you believe that.
