I was curious if the Minolta 200mm HS APO stacks up against the Tamron 70-300mm VC SP at 200mm F5.6 and F8, mostly for landscapes at 200mm.
Are the resolution figures comparable across systems if the # of megapixels and format the same?
Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
[quote name='FlyPenFly' timestamp='1313635170' post='10799']
Are the resolution figures comparable across systems if the # of megapixels and format the same?
[/quote]
No.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
[quote name='FlyPenFly' timestamp='1313635170' post='10799']
I was curious if the Minolta 200mm HS APO stacks up against the Tamron 70-300mm VC SP at 200mm F5.6 and F8, mostly for landscapes at 200mm.
Are the resolution figures comparable across systems if the # of megapixels and format the same?
[/quote]
Look at the resolution BARS instead, not the numbers. Comparing those will get a good enough idea.
However, without looking at them I can already tell that both lenses will be very similar with 200mm stopped down images, resolution wise. 200mm f8 is not really taxing for any lens.
I think the problem is more complex. I heard that the same sensor (made by Sony) has better resolution in Nikon than in Sony camera.
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
[quote name='fotografia opole' timestamp='1314964594' post='11257']
I think the problem is more complex. I heard that the same sensor (made by Sony) has better resolution in Nikon than in Sony camera.
[/quote]
That does not make anything more complex. Still: compare the bar heights, not the numbers. This gives you a good enough idea how the lenses compare. If there was no difference in AA-filter, the Nikon and Sony would have similar resolution measurements and you could compare the numbers too.
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1313642663' post='10800']
No.
-- Markus
[/quote]
But why?
Posts: 7,999
Threads: 1,849
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
[quote name='Yury_S' timestamp='1315502772' post='11434']
But why?
[/quote]
See Lens Test FAQ.
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1315504064' post='11435']
See Lens Test FAQ.
[/quote]
Thank you, Klaus! I saw it.
This question was for my friend who says:
"If one lens with camera which has a lower resolution in megapixels (Canon 5DmkII and 24-70/2.8L) has close or slightly better resolution figures than other camera which has a higher resolution (Sony A900 and CZ 24-70/2.8 ZA), this means that 24-70/2.8L is better than CZ 24-70/2.8 ZA.
AA filters and different RAW-converters do not matter in this case.»
Is he right? If not, what he is mistaken?
(Sorry my bad english)
Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
[quote name='Yury_S' timestamp='1315550270' post='11442']
AA filters and different RAW-converters do not matter in this case.»
Is he right? If not, what he is mistaken?
[/quote]
No, he's not right. The AA-filter and RAW converter are a fundamental part of the whole image workflow and have a influence on the resolution figures.
The results we present here are only comparable within the same test system. Drawing conclusions across different systems based on the resolution numbers is an invalid approach.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
' />