Alan Browne wrote:
On 2013.03.20 22:16 , Doug McDonald wrote:
On 3/20/2013 6:34 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
The pictures show CONCLUSIVELY that the lens is fully adequate to
resolve adjacent pixels, and that the AA filer is NOT seriously
smearing
out the image enough to stop moire.

If the AA smeared it enough to remove the moiré that you captured in
your contrivation, then you would be just as happy with the detail of a
6 Mpix camera. Probably not even then.

I never said that I wanted no moire in this absolutely
utterly
worst case moire test. What makes you think I did? I LIKE the camera
the way it is. I just pointed out that if one tried to get it
to generate moire, it will do so.

Your "absurd" declaration did not, in any way, disprove what I said
about lens MTF softening as desired sampling (sensor density) goes up.

I thought the point was not that Doug diusputed that.

I thought the point was that Doug said that with his camera
and lens the point of lens MTF softening was not reached.

Further, what I said above wrt to AA filters was not meant to be what
you desire, just to illustrate the sort of heavy AA filter that would be
required to tame the moiré in your high school lab experiment.

(Another way of showing the irrelevancy of your examples if I have to
make that plain to you.)

The tactic of misunderstanding the point and ignoring
experiments and facts that collide with one's world view is
well used by fundamentalists and radicals everywhere.

Doug made it clear that under normal circumstances such moire
didn't happen.

Of course a lens with a crappy MTF will reduce moire. But my
trusty 24-105 f/4L zoom, not exactly the best L glass ever,
still generates some moire.

In summary, you retract what you said about my statement of lens mtf
acting as a softening filter where ever increasing sensor densities are
occurring.

Thought so. Next time just keep your hands off the keyboard and save
everyone some bandwidth.

Next time you take down your own strawmen, try not to gloat
so much.

-Wolfgang