I find this fascinating, wondering if anyone else feels this way

[Canoncan59]

Being a Canon F1 film user with FD lenses, i  started with the first DIgital Rebel, went to a 20D, then a 40D, jumped to a 1D MKIIN, the a 5D3 and then a 5D4 and now an R5. i still have many many shots taken with a my 20 and 40D's. Is it me, many of these are some of the best quality i have . Sharper and less noise out of the camera, not sure if anti alias filters have changed this, however many 10s of thousands of dollars later, wondering if my 40D and 400 5.6 L should be with me now. Note this taken with the 40D

[Canoncan59]

I appreciate those that offered intuitive feedback. I certainly was not comparing the improvements with low light noise, auto focus improvements and other technological advances. I was more interested in have the advancements on any technology had a negative impact on IQ. All lenses I’ve owned since FD lenses have been L. I apologize if my remedial explanations, were not keeping up with the solipsism of others

[shawnphoto]

Maybe some advancements have moderately and temporarily slowed the rate of IQ improvement in an absolute sense. Other aspects of IQ have improved as a result, otherwise it would not have been done. As certain technologies are brought into play maximum IQ will again get pushed higher. For instance, is it possible to make use of the full 90 megapixel readout of the R5??

[Waddizzle]

---

@Ray-uk wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

---

---

Sorry, but I unequivocally disagree with that opinion.  Someone seems to think sharpness comes from the camera, and not the lens.  I seriously doubt if an R5 can capture a better 5MB image with the same lens.  The comment thoroughly offensive.

---

My reply was to the original post from Canoncan59  that started this thread. I wouldn't bother to reply to the obnoxious post from Shawnphoto.

Sharpness requires a good lens fitted to a good camera, they both contribute.

---

Oops!  My bad.