I did check it out, sort of. I figure if I don't understand the need for (or lack thereof) an anti-aliasing filter, I won't know or notice the difference. I'm pretty much clueless when it comes to tech issues. As they say, ignorance is bliss.
I compose an image in my mind, try to set the correct exposure, re-compose, set the polarization, check the exposure and push the button. If I can get those right, I'm happier than a pig in poop. Anything more and I'm fearful of becoming orgasmic. LOL.
Feel free to explain why I need the anti-aliasing filter removed for better images of the kind I make. Maybe I can still change my order.
I never inferred that you needed a camera without a anti-aliasing filter.
What the not having the filter would do, as I understand it (and I could possibly be wrong too), you just have more information in the picture, the edges would look sharper when zoomed to max.
Good call, Mule. The "last great invention" hasn't been invented yet...so there's still time....and a buncha more gimmicks commin'. I'm extremely patient. In the meantime, enjoy the your "choice" alternative!
Good call, Mule. The "last great invention" hasn't been invented yet...so there's still time....and a buncha more gimmicks commin'. I'm extremely patient. In the meantime, enjoy the your "choice" alternative!