[Steinar1]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1290773926' post='4470']

Regarding Nyquist - you can look a bit beyond the barrier if you're test target is known. You cannot if you've no idea of what you're measuring of course. The K10D does naturally not deliver a resolution beyond that - especially considering Bayer. It's just about measuring a lens potential (FWIW, the big one provides resolution figures beyond Nyquist in their lens tests as well).

I will certainly not go into the details of the local testing procedure. Leave us our little secrets, please. :-) However, the basic procedure is described at imatest.com. Their documentation is very extensive and their method is used across the whole industry (including the some of the camera manufacturers). They also describe a little how they can measure beyond Nyquist if you're interested.

I reckon that the resolution numbers are not overly accurate anymore beyond Nyquist but that's my personal guess here.



As far as "false detail" is concerned:

http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d200hr.htm

http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d300HR.htm

http://www.maxmax.com/nikon_d700hr.htm



There's certainly some amount of false details in the "hot rod" versions. However, there's also a fair amount of extra detail as far as I can tell. Sharpening during post-processing will not recover all this and it would just come at cost of more noise anyway.



Just to clarify this - I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS TO NORMAL USERS and most will not invest the bucks anyway.



And another note - I'm just guessing that the K5 has a strong AA filter. The "softness" may also originate in RAW NR. Only Pentax does not for sure (so far).



And one more - I know Falk personally. He lives just around the corner actually. A highly knowledgeable guy and I agree with him about the AA. The question is about the thickness, not about its existence. I would, of course, prefer to have some sort of AA filter like e.g. in the Pana G series. This is preferable to none at all. However, I doubt that a very strong AA filter is the right solution. The service company will "exchange" the AA filter so they'll not just remove it - they claim a gain of effective resolution of 30% max. so I suspect that there's still some filtering in there.

[/quote]



Hi Klaus

I read the article and info on the HR conversions wih interest. You say you do not recommend it to normal users. Why not? The increase in sharpness on my D300s seems fantastic. Are there disadvantages, beyond the price? Kidly Vieux Loup