Search:

Type: Posts; User: pin008

Search: Search took 0.01 seconds.

  1. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    DLA is the aperture where diffraction begins to visibly affect image sharpness at the pixel level.








    /cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.46.61/airy.jpg
  2. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    What I use for guideis the THE BEST APERTURE.
  3. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    You agree that DLA is based on Rayleigh criterion. My textbook tells Rayleigh criterion determineslimiting resolution of a telescope set by diffraction. it is a hard limit on resolution...
  4. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    Wow! that's truth. I'll remember it.


    And learn to understand the others, try tofollow their idea, keep an open mind.
  5. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    DLA is calculated under Rayleigh criterion(1.22λf/D). Rayleigh criterionsays an18MP sensor should have the same resolution as a 10MP sensor when the aperture is narrower than 10MP's DLA, which...
  6. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    to wickerprints,


    my diagram is to show how tiny morediffractioninfluence large size pixel.
  7. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    i don't understand why you think or how you can prove that the effects of diffraction are so minute that it is practically imperceptible at apertures wider.


    in my diagram, since the pixels...
  8. Re: Ordering from China: Does anyone have any experience or good information about this?

    i am from chinaand i am pertty sure it's a swindler.


    Do not send you money!!!


    chinese camera market is somehowclarity. 5D MKII sells RMB16000 (euro 1800)here at least. and the trade price...
  9. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    After your excellent post, I don't think there's anything I could possibly add to the discussion. Of course, that's never stopped me before.
  10. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    the graph is a sketch map, but i think you know what i mean.
  11. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    According to the DLA theory which should be like graph A. pictures lose sharpness quickly after DLA, so DLA is an important critical value.


    but what i see islike graph B.




    ...
  12. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    ye, I somehow agree with you.


    but in my opinion, diffraction shows not only as on dot becomes a airy disk, or on single line became wider these kind of details, but the change of contrast in...
  13. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    You gentlman, i respect your opinion "that phrase DLA in terms of loss of sharpness at a fixed sensor resolution when stopping down further; i.e., a particular sensor "starts to show" a loss of...
  14. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span lang="EN-US"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Let me prove it.
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span...
  15. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    If you think I have some aggressive or sarcastic attitude, I hereby formly apologize! i didnt mean it.


    as a non-native speeker, to express my debate is already hard. I can hardly arrange noble...
  16. Re: DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    Read the 1st sentence and understand it.
  17. DLA is Nonsense! It should be deleted from the reviews.

    Everybody knows small aperture means strong diffraction, but there is no limit from the pixel size and density.


    According toDigital SLR Camera Reviews here, so-called DLA (Diffraction Limited...
Results 1 to 17 of 17