>>4246829>Downsampling doesn't really get you better performance than using the same resolution you're downsampling to natively.Yes it does retard. Higher SNR and sharper images. It's literally physics. See how an R6II can BTFO an A7S III if you pretend it has 12mp in post?
https://photographylife.com/why-downsampling-an-image-reduces-noise>>4246831You CAN, but you probably WONT. I have missed shots of candids because of motion blur at 1/500, with the camera on a tripod with a fluid head, and 8 stop RF IBS+ILS, not that it mattered at 75mm and 1/500. 1/60 can be too slow for children trying to hold still unless you accept a low hit rate and SD card rape burst shooting. Please refer to the person who has shot events for pay (me) and is used to guaranteeing perfectly sharp candids, you dumb fuck no-photo /pol/ faggot.
IBIS is not low light unless you're shooting at super telephoto lengths where the 1/fl and 1/fl*2 rules are too fast for your subject. Or shooting boring shit like your dog sleeping on the floor, or a building corner, or a stop sign, or the moon, that I can see in more detail with my own eye and a telescope rather than delegating it to some shady digital imaging device with hidden AI bugs in it (every digital camera ever made is bugged, fyi).
Let me guess, you have some dogshit camera from 2005, or film, so whole inches of subject motion literally don't move the details a whole pixel? Or you just shoot your cat? I have an R5 and an R6 II. 1/60 is too slow for candids. It's dangerously slow for posed portraits unless working with an actual model. Even on the R6 II.
