Saturday, November 24, 2012
How The Hell Did Having No AA Filter Become THE Feature To Have?
I'm confused by this because in the grand scheme of camera features that I want, no-AA filter is WAY down the list. I want more media choices, faster write times, better lenses, longer battery life, etc. I'm not even thinking about the sensor, since much of what the sensor does is out of the control of the company making the camera. All I'm thinking about are elements that can easily be bolted on from extant technology and features.
Like for Olympus, I want an adapter that lets me use the damned 4/3 lenses! They don't even need to make a new set of lenses! Just do what Sony did. But instead of that, Oly has given us... no AA filter? W the F?
The lack of AA filter does seem to increase the amount of light hitting the sensor, which is great. The upcoming Sony A99 is rumored to have no filter, and it will need it. The SLT mirror takes a big whack out of a camera's ISO performance. It also causes some softness, which will act like an AA filter. And for smaller sensors like those in 4/3, any ISO increase is desirable.
But again, what about the other features!? Why is everyone talking about the lack of AA filters as though it is the next thing from Apple? How in the world did this become the biggest point of discussion?
I think that it is a conspiracy to deflect our attention from other, more useful features that camera companies don't want us to have. It probably has something to do with the upcoming Mayan Apocalypse Yes. That's it. Camera companies are actually run by Mayans! It's not the end of the world, it is the rise of the Mayans! They're coming back and they are using our cameras to do it!