Polariser filter

[glen_h]

That's all very well, but it's still possible to provoke moire effects with the D800. For example, by copying half-tone dots at a magnification where the dot spacing is close to the photosite spacing.

 

I suspect that the lack of efficacy of any AA filter that doesn't also totally negate a high pixel density, is the reason that manufacturers simply dropped the inclusion of AA filters altogether.

 

Whatever. This is wandering way off topic from the linear v circular polariser debate/mythology. The type of which, as shown above, seems to make very little difference to either camera operation or sensor image.

 

And I'm not about to buy a Canon Pellix or Sony a77 to find exceptions to the rule.

 

BTW, kudos for finding the Alt-graphics key combo to get the lambda symbol!

 

Well, also that the site spacing is approaching the lens resolution.

As Nikon notes in the linked article, stop down a few stops, and diffraction will do it.

 

My dad bought a Pellix when they were new. Some years later, it was stolen out of the trunk of the car.

 

About 6 years ago, I got one from a Goodwill auction for $44. The mirror is a little dusty, though.

 

The Pellix manual doesn't mention polarizing filters. I was trying to remember if I knew that years ago.

 

Oh, the lambda comes from a web search, and then cut/paste.

[rodeo_joe1]

Well, also that the site spacing is approaching the lens resolution.

Nah! Most Planar-clone standard 50mm lenses will resolve over 200 lppmm @ f/5.6 and there are no 140 megapixel full-frame sensors that'll image that natively without using pixel-shift.

As Nikon notes in the linked article, stop down a few stops, and diffraction will do it.

Or, for flat artwork copying, just throw the focus off a tad.

 

In fact Nikon's flaky AF might do that for you automatically. ;)