61ache wrote in post #6614371
What I don't understand about the DPReview is the comparision between the 40D and 50D on RAW sharpness. They compared pixel for pixel, but the 50D has 50% more pixels. When I look at an image at 50% and 100% in my editor, yeah the 50% looks sharper...duh. Doesn't quite seem like an apples to apples comparison. I'm relatively a dummy on this, but wouldn't it be a better comparison if they measured a 1" by 1" crop and not pixel for pixel?
Yes, comparing cameras at both 100% and at equal density would make a lot more sense. Also, you have to note that their tests are usually shot at high apertures, yet if you do the math, after about 13mp, you don't gain any usable resolution at f8, or after 7mp at f11. Of course the 50d will look dull, it hit the diffraction limit. No matter how good the lens is, that limit is absolute for an aperture based lens.
Nobody prints high ISO things at large sizes and expects iso100 results. Just reduce the size and you'll see that the quality is slightly better than on the 40d. Still no 1dmkiii, d3, or 5dmkii, but it's better than what you had before.
I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.