David Littlewood
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:31 am Post subject:
Re: When to use smaller aperture? |
|
|
In article <dk5vm7$30o7$1@agate.berkeley.edu>, Ilya Zakharevich
<nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> writes
| Quote: | [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Lorem Ipsum
nospam@nospam.com>], who wrote in article
11mc79nh2392t45@news.supernews.com>:
Absolutely no. To make your fallacy clear, compare an image done with
f/90 on 6x6 with one made with a decent lens at f/8 on 35mm. The
image on 35mm will require more magnification, but the result after
magnification will be much better (resolution-wise for subject at
focus) when the 6x6.
Dear Ilya, we have been over this quite often before elsewhere. I fear that
you live in your head and have not had the opportunity to let your eyes
judge the outcomes of your mental experiments: that is, you don't make
pictures with various formats. It is also possible your intellectual bias
blinds you to real outcomes.
I just can't fathom where you are coming from.
Likewise. What is your point, really? Are you going to say that *in
the examples above*, the produced image from 6x6 is going to be better
than one of 35mm?
First, rationalize your input; why F/90 for the 6x6?
Did you read my posting? Dave made a blanket statement. I had shown
that this blanket statement does not work *without further
qualifications*.
[It turns out that these further qualifications make his statement
irrelevant to the preceeding discussion, but this is not related to
this subthread, right?]
(1) My name is David, not Dave |
(2) The qualification "other things being equal" was clearly set out a
couple of lines away from your selective quote.
(3) Your points are the ones which are utterly without relevance to the
point under discussion, backed up by spurious and distorted comparisons,
and lacking the basic comprehension required to follow the thread of an
argument.
I'm prepared to make allowances in case English is not your first
language, but you seem to suffer more from unwillingness to listen.
Unless a genuinely new point comes up, I'm done.
David
--
David Littlewood
|
|
David Littlewood
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:34 am Post subject:
Re: When to use smaller aperture? |
|
|
In article <dk6098$30u5$1@agate.berkeley.edu>, Ilya Zakharevich
<nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> writes
| Quote: | [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
David Littlewood
david@nospam.demon.co.uk>], who wrote in article
AfD2vKFkqiZDFwfg@dlittlewood.co.uk>:
This quality limitation is usually the lens. It is much harder to
make a longer focus lens with the same angle of view and the same
resolution at focal plane. Thus smaller sensors may be used with much
better quality lenses (in the metric relevant to the topic),
In the past it was commonly believed that lenses for larger formats were
inevitably lower in resolution than those for 35mm. However, this is now
seen to be not necessarily true (the lenses for my Mamiya 6. for
example, are as good as anything commonly available for 35mm).
What metric do you use? For me, an excellent 35mm lens is one which
can produce MTF 50% at 40lp/mm corner-to-corner. Some Leica lenses
can do it. [Kodak claims that his lenses can do it, but since they
post theoretical MTF curves (as opposed to measured ones), this is
much harder to believe.]
So, what makes the Mamiya 6 lenses close to that?
|
Practical hands-on experience comparing them with a sizeable collection
of Canon L lenses, Contax lenses, and Schneider and Rodagon LF lenses.
| Quote: |
Did you see the images? BTW, the metric dpreview uses is lines per
short side of the image.
I didn't see the need to wade through the test as it is not relevant to
the point at issue.
Sure, judge yourselves. But anyone who would look would not indulge
in this discussion: these images speak better than words:
If you go for best resolution, then you get practically identical
(resolution-wise) images from APS format (with prime lens) and 2/3''
format (with 7x zoom).
|
Since the comparison was not the one under discussion, no.
| Quote: |
Hope this helps,
Ilya
|
It doesn't.
--
David Littlewood |
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in