I think the aliasing problem can be more severe if you are not working in the constraints of the portrait studio.
In location work, eg: architectural exteriors it can appear on all sorts of surface textures. For example a building that I shot was faced with flint and the result was covered with many tiny magenta pinpricks. Specular highlights are fringed and spotted with magenta. Fixing this eg: by de-sat filtering or noise reduction can knock the "emotion" out of the results. This camera takes great pictures when it is photographing scenes with the right sort of lighting. If you arent' lucky then in my view the post processing is far too onerous and may remove quality. It requires less manual processing to shoot film then scan. The elapsed time is longer and you can't take as many shots with this... but I feel the advantages of a purely digital process can be overstated. In my view the reviews I have seen have downplayed these problems as most of them have involved studio style tests. I wish this wasn't true, because when things go well, this camera does indeed begin to reach MF quality. >The lack of an AA filter helps to give really great > resolution. It also yields images with more aliasing artifacts and > moire than your used to with a D1x. I like working without an AA > filter. > The forums at places like dpreview > are littered with posts (flames?) from photographers who haven't quite > grasped this concept yet. -- Paul R. W. Freeman w:www.architecturalimages.co.uk -- ____________________________________________________ Message scanned for viruses and dangerous content by <http://www.newnet.co.uk/av/> and believed to be clean =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
