On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:49:47 -0800, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
> I agree, as I did before, that this is an exceptionally good photograph.
> However, I just don't see how one can tell if a photo is sharp or not
> from a JPEG 900 pixels on the long side. I've got some images that look
> nice and sharp at that kind of resolution, but clearly aren't when
> viewed at 100%. I only raise the issue here because this thread started
> out being about the quality of images from certain lenses and cameras
> vs. others.
>
> Moose
>
Thanks, Moose. I agree. With this negative, you have to get the lupe out
and have a good look. It was the start of my realisation of how much shake
there is in hand-held SLR shots, at least in my hands. With the
rangefinders, handheld can be very sharp. With an SLR, I really need a
monopod at least, for critical sharpness a tripod and some method of
damping vibration, as advised by Olympus.
Haven't had the lupe on the Barcelona shots yet, but one or two look
hopeful.
D.
--
Donald Neil MacDonald BA DipLIS
www.skelpitheid.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|