I wanted to through this out there to see if you had any feedback. How much do you think the AA filter on say, a D800, reduces optical sharpness vs a dslr without the AA filter?
I’ve noticed my d800 scans appear “less sharp” than the scans feom my plustek. The D800 scans are not bad, but when comparing side by side, the level of sharpness and to an extent, detail on the plustek seems to be of higher definition and detail. Even wirh additional sharpening on my D800 (using 60 mm Nikon G at f8). Im curious if the AA filter is adding to this quality shift.
The impression of something being sharp depends on many things…
- does your scanner add some sharpening? (check the scan settings)
- what are the pixel dimensions of your plustek scannner’s output files?
- is your photo scan adequately focused?
When scanning, I am using vuescan. All sharpening is off.
Output files on plustek are roughly 4600x3100
DSLR scan is focused on the grain. I am also using an EFH with a Viltrox light source.
I guess the big question I have is, for those of you who have used both a DSLR with an AA filter and one without, have you seen detail/sharpness improvements between the two?
Here’s some third party info:
interesting, so it seems to have a very small, negligible impact. Thank you for the info
I use my D800 for most digitizing, but have done side-by-side tests comparing it to a D810 and D850, primarily with 6x6 cm B&W negatives.
D800 vs D810: virtually identical, with no advantage to the D810.
D800 vs D850: Very slight advantage to the D850, which I think is due to the higher resolution rather than the lack of AA filter. It would be difficult to tell one from the other when printed at 24x24".
These are historical negatives from the 1950s and 60s, professionally photographed and very sharp. It’s possible that newer films with finer grain may detect more difference between the cameras.