>>4404489
>They are, by a big margin. You are simply not shooting complex subjects
Official way to measure sharpness of a lens (or camera+lens) is to take a picture of a step function and see what you get in the end, and from this you can calculate MTF or whatever it is called.
And step function isn't something fancy, its just black on white with a very sharp border. Like Siemens chart. Or bars. Or whatever. That isn't a complex subject.
While I didn't do it, because I have no idea how, nor I don't really want to, I took various pictures. Birds (feathers are a small detail), buildings, etc. All cameras except fuji were pretty close. Some are slightly better, some are slightly worse. But in the same ballpark.
Definitely not APS-C or FF or even MFT in terms of obtained details (because sensor is small, lenses aren't the best, etc. You know, even kit lenses with DSLRs or MILCs or whatever would produce much sharper image with more details)...
Digishit quality, as it should be. Except phone, phone has awful colors.

Fuji however, even after making it save CCD raw from the engineering menu, was blurry as fuck. That is weird, because it felt more like cheapo phone that does AI garbage, but nope, just blurry lens. But that blurry lens takes surprisingly good close ups, and I don't understand why.
>cameras aren't sharp, lenses are
Those are digishits with non-interchangable, so a camera (entire thing) is more correct.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/p/

Thread:

Explain optics to me.