mk3 feels "richer"? but do i see a 1500 dollar difference yet? no. am i saving all my pennies? yes. i still have yet to see a proper jello test or real world use, but PB is working on that, right
Sharpness the same. Moiré gone. That's about it! Plus more light sensitive of course, but not relevant in this shot.
The $1500 difference are for a lot more than 2 pictures. Dual SD Cards, Audio Levels, Better ISO, Better View finder which I know is helping a lot of people, Audio monitoring. It's like anything if you need those features pay extra if you don't then don't buy it. I can't wait to get mine!
Sure ... but I think we were just referring to image differences. All the stuff you mention is huge. But it's 1 CF and 1 SD slot, not dual SD ... weird combination, I know.
It's a lovely camera the highlights roll off very nicely, off course like all the additions like audio monitoring etc but I suppose was thinking the resolution might have gone up a notch.
What color profile are you using? Both the same? That glare in the car also caught my attention. About the CF/SD card thing, make sense if you plan to use CF to save pictures locally and remote via Eye-Fi to your computer.
Profiles identical. Neutral (top down) 0 | -2 | -2 | -1 If you increase the sharpness to compensate you get a false sharpness USM around edges and a strange noise reduction that makes the image more plastic. Bit the mk2 but the noise reduction this camera has is strange. (Note. all noise reduction setting turned off in menus)
I shot some street scenes yesterday on a 50mm at around f2-5.6 that looked lovely no moire. So for the fact its has no moire at zero sharpness is a great thing.
My eye trained in on the "41" on both images (is this because I am rapidly approaching 40?). The MKII '41' appears more defined and sharper.
Gosh, it's soft isn't it? Still, no aliasing at least, which is a massive improvement for most people.
