Originally posted by Trickortreat Yes, I know, but even if the lens cant handle the full super res resolution there would be an increase in resolution nonetheless...
No sure, it depends... I've played with pixel shift of the K1 in order to find for myself when I get a benefit and when I don't get a benefit. For cases where I don't get a benefit it is more simple to take a single frame with electronic shutter.
I've tried pixel shift at various lens apertures with newspaper on the wall as a test chart, using the 100mm macro , focused with 8x mag. in LV.
At aperture f11, I get zero improvement of sharpness with PS vs a single shot ES.
At aperture f8, I get very little improvement of sharpness with PS vs single shot ES.
At aperture f5.6, I can see a bump in sharpness using PS compared to a single shot with ES.
At aperture f4, I can see super sharp pixels in the center but not at the edges when using PS , compared to ES baseline.
So , for example, I never use PS when shooting a landscape at f11 or f16 and ISO100, because.. for me the noise is already very low at ISO 100 and PS doesn't bring me more sharpness at f11 or f16 (lens diffraction).
However, for a macro flat subject, I set the crop mode on K1, get as close as possible, lens aperture at f5.6, and there I get wowed by the detail and color micro-contrast.
So given what I can see of improvements condition with a 4 x pixel shift on the K1, I don't think the 16 x half pixel shift on the Sony A7R4 will be having a benefit enough to bother storing 2Gb files and processing them.