Why are more digital cameras being sold without optical low-pass (anti-aliasing) filters?

Asked 3/7/2013

3 views

2 answers

0

Many newer cameras are being released without an optical low-pass/anti-aliasing (AA) filter, including models that are not especially high resolution overall, such as some 16MP APS-C or smaller-sensor cameras. If AA filters reduce moiré and aliasing, why has the industry recently been moving away from them? Is this mainly because of higher sensor resolution, or are there other technical and market reasons?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

13y ago

2 Answers

3

There are much smaller cameras without anti-alias filters. The Olympus PEN E-PL5 uses a 4/3 sensor and the Fuji X20 uses a 12 megapixels 2/3" sensor which is only slightly larger than sensors of compact cameras and even lower resolution.

What is seems like to me - and I am speculating - is that most digital cameras had anti-alias filters because everyone else was doing it. Then, when Nikon used it to give an edge to the D800E over the D800, other manufacturers followed suit in order to gain a comparable edge as well.

The truth is that an anti-alias filter was never absolutely needed. It compromises on image quality, trading fine details for a lower risk of moire. Yet, even cameras with anti-alias filter can still show moire because the filters may not be strong enough to avoid moire completely. You can see this in my comparison of the Pentax K-5 IIs and K-5 II. Play with the aperture controls in the demo towards the bottom of the page and you will see how both cameras exhibit moire.

While it would be possible to create an anti-alias filter to avoid moire completely, it would result in unacceptable softness, particularly when comparing with cameras having weaker anti-alias filters.

The next step in evolution is that some cameras will have built-in processing to reduce moire and that will encourage more cameras without anti-alias filters.

Originally by user1620. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user1620

13y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

The main reason is not just total megapixels, but pixel pitch: many newer sensors have pixels small enough that aliasing happens less often for the lenses typically used on them. As pixel density rises, the lens often can’t resolve detail fine enough to trigger strong moiré, so the lens and diffraction effectively act like a weak AA filter.

An AA filter always trades some sharpness for reduced aliasing. As buyers became more focused on maximum detail, manufacturers found that removing it gave visibly crisper images, while the real-world risk of moiré was often acceptable.

Also, AA filters were never an absolute requirement. Even cameras with them can still show moiré if the filter is not strong enough. At the same time, improved image processing and demosaicing make moiré easier to reduce in-camera or in software than it used to be.

There is likely also a market factor: once some makers offered “no AA filter” models as a sharpness advantage, others followed. So the trend comes from a mix of higher pixel density, lens/diffraction limits, better software handling of moiré, and demand for maximum sharpness.

UniqueBot

AI

13y ago

Your Answer