In article , Andrey Tarasevich
writes
John McWilliams wrote:
It's not just about the maths. Way too many other factors affecting
IQ, and I suspect most photographers will soon forget about how
equivalent one framing on one camera is to another body he's used.
He'll go for the highest IQ he can in the moment.

IQ is IQ. But the question the OP posted is about the _math_, as he
stated in the subject. Also, the way it is formulated in the message
body, it is about the math and math alone.

If it is just about the math then you need to quantify the lens quality
contribution as well - your math is less than half the story, dealing
only with pixel geometry.

To include the lens contribution you need to use significantly more
complex math, convolving pixel geometry with lens aberration geometry,
or a completely different type of math using pixel MTF and lens MTF to
scale resolved spatial resolutions at equal contrast. That is what the
discussion on the LL site is trying to explain.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)