11-26-2010, 11:28 AM
[quote name='awaldram' timestamp='1290766085' post='4462']
It would appear to me applying the same criteria as applied to your k10d figure would see the k5 hitting 2800 with a vanishing point around 3000.
As I can easily see false detail well past 2800.
[/quote]
The results from the different websites are not cross-comparable.
The locally provided numbers here were based on converted DNGed with the same (old) RAW converter. It is extremely unlikely that the others sites have done exactly the same. Some do their comparisons based on JPEGs, some on native RAW converters, some on the same converter but different versions, etc. pp.
I'm sometimes wondering how other sites measure the "extincting" resolution in order to make them comparable. This is all very dependent on how you convert the RAWs.
It would appear to me applying the same criteria as applied to your k10d figure would see the k5 hitting 2800 with a vanishing point around 3000.
As I can easily see false detail well past 2800.
[/quote]
The results from the different websites are not cross-comparable.
The locally provided numbers here were based on converted DNGed with the same (old) RAW converter. It is extremely unlikely that the others sites have done exactly the same. Some do their comparisons based on JPEGs, some on native RAW converters, some on the same converter but different versions, etc. pp.
I'm sometimes wondering how other sites measure the "extincting" resolution in order to make them comparable. This is all very dependent on how you convert the RAWs.