On 28/10/2012 4:39 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Oct 28, 2012, at 3:26 PM, William Robb wrote:
On 28/10/2012 1:50 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Oct 28, 2012, at 12:48 PM, David Parsons wrote:
So, you'd have sensor based IS trying to keep the sensor stable during
an exposure, and at the same time, moving the sensor to introduce AA?
What does 'mechanical AA do that the optical method doesn't do? What
would be the advantage of it?
The advantage is that most of the time you leave it off. But, if you have
something like the K5-IIs, without optical AA, and you are photographing
something with a pattern, like fabric, you could turn it on.
And I'd implement it as an either/or with image stabilization, not a both at
the same time.
Seems to me if the sensor moves in relation to the projected image during the
exposure, you are going to just get a blurred image. This isn't quite what an
AA filter does.
I thought that what an AA filter did was specifically to blur the image on the
order of a pixel width so that no transition was narrower than a pixel. I.e.
acting as a low pass filter to ensure that there are no patterns of a higher
frequency than the sampling rate.
The trick would be to only blur the image on the order of a pixel.
--
The blur you are describing by moving the sensor would look like camera
shake. The blur from an AA filter is more akin to putting a soft focus
filter on the lens (albeit a VERY mild one)
--
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
