Originally posted by normhead ....even if there is pixel peeking difference, there is no practical difference. It may come as a shock to some, but pixel peeping is not an enjoyable way to view images.
A completely valid point, that 75-90% of photographers out there should take under strong advisement. I sometimes lose sight of this fact, however recently I've honestly been more and more of an advocate of 1.5x sensors being the hands-down winner in value, and all-around performance from a practical everyday standpoint. In other words, I've been agreeing with you for a while now, but this time I just wanted to make a point about envelope-pushing.
There are still the last 5-10% of us who truly do push the envelope in a crazy, even bizarre ways. Where every last bit of image quality that can possibly be pixel-peeped out of a camera or lens could potentially make a rather noticeable difference in a final product, when viewed as big as it deserves to be...
Here's a couple examples of what I mean by crazy shenanigans: (Please excuse the use of non-Pentax cameras. Using a full-frame sensor was very important for these projects. I'm really looking forward to using the full-frame Pentax in similar, or even worse, conditions soon!
In these environments, I'll take every fraction of a stop of better IQ that I can, in almost every aspect possibly measurable. (Dynamic range, high ISO, dynamic range AT a high ISO, per-pixel acuity, resistance to weird artifacts, coma, vignetting, ...the list is long!)
In other environments, yes I do sometimes push my shadows and blacks to +100, my Highlights and Whites to -100, and my exposure to anywhere between -2 and +2.
Not because I'm a measurbating pixel-peeper, but because I actually use these settings, this equipment, to get certain photos that would be difficult or impossible to capture any other way.
=Matt=
Last edited by Matthew Saville; 09-25-2015 at 01:26 PM.