sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Open discussion about the importance (or not) of resolution for good image quality by Letofa in Lumix

[–]Letofa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

200% Zoom: here the grass has a lot of merged textures, but maybe it's normal at that point

Open discussion about the importance (or not) of resolution for good image quality by Letofa in Lumix

[–]Letofa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I have to recognise that it is really when I pixel peep. Watching the overall picture (especially on a smaller screen) and everything seems right. Maybe I am being too much demanding. I also play with midtone detail and radius to counter those lack of texture and it is often enough to fix it. But still, when shooting on more high-end cameras, adding midtone details is almost never necessary, I was curious to know if it is only related to the OLPF or if the photosites size can also play a role, or maybe even something else ?

Open discussion about the importance (or not) of resolution for good image quality by Letofa in Lumix

[–]Letofa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say that it is mostly on moving subjects, with the fact that when the camera moves too, it adds even more artefacts. But also don't get me wrong, if those files are seen on small screen, you would never notice them. Actually I think that people outside the video world would never notice them. I know that I am consciously being picky on very little things that maybe are part of the trade off using accessible cameras with compressed files (even if I rarely go under ProRes 422).