On 1/30/2012 5:48 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Yes, at a marked f/11 (and affectively well beyond that at close focus)
> all of these lenses were way, way into diffraction territory on a 4/3
> 10MP sensor.
Read the subject line. FF on 5D
> I would estimate theoretical maximum resolution is limited
> by diffraction to about 2MP. Not nearly that bad if he used the 5D
> instead of the E-3(?). But, in the end, the diffraction and sensor size
> doesn't matter since he overrode all of it with the crop
Whoa! Where did that come from? There's no mention of cropping, the format is
perfect 3:2. All the care given to moving
the tripod for equal framing with different lenses would certainly suggest no
need post capture cropping, in fact, the
reverse.
> and drastic downsizing. We can't see what was left regardless of its size.
> :-)
I've already posted that it's not a very good test without some unreduced
samples. And yet ... Both Chris and I in some
way saw the first one as in some way less sharp.
I think maybe even with the considerable downsizing, perhaps particularly
without resharpening, there is still something
subtle that those with good eyes can pick up on.
Eagle Eye Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|