We are agreed!
Which is something of a relief, as discussing DoF in written text is usually
a recipe for mutual misunderstanding and ultimate disaster.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Chuck Norcutt
Sent: 30 November 2007 12:56
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Is the emperor called hyperfocal distance that well
dressed?
Differences should not be perceptible as long as you stay at 250mm from the
print. Unless, of course, you have sharper than normal vision which may be
the case. But if you do or if you find that you're really pixel peeping and
find that's your norm then you don't need a new Merklinger theory of DoF.
You only need to tighten the assumptions on CoC and close down another stop
or two from the markings on your lens.
Chuck Norcutt
Piers Hemy wrote:
> Chuck, I agree with both your points below but my persepctive is a bit
> different (and not because I'm using a shift lens!) - it's that we
> judge whether an image is "out of focus" by reference to other parts
> of the image which are "in focus". If the lens can resolve better
> than the theory assumes, then even though the 8x10 is within
> acceptable tolerances (enlargement size, viewing distance) for a sharp
> image, differences are perceptible.
>
> Perhaos it's that I am looking at the image too closely?
>
> Perhaps "pixel peeping" has a longer heritage than just digital
> photography??
>
>
> --
> Piers
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Chuck Norcutt
> Sent: 30 November 2007 12:37
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Re: Is the emperor called hyperfocal distance that well
> dressed?
>
> --snip
> Although he may be interested in knowing if June is recognizable as
> June at 50 meters I'm not. I want to know if June is critically sharp
> at 50 meters for a 16x20 print and she's not.
>
> --snip
>
> If your lens and film/sensor can resolve enough detail for a crisp
> 16x20 rather than an 8x10 that's good. But it doesn't obviate the
> accuracy of the DoF markings when used as intended... for an 8x10 max
print size.
>
> --snip
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|