View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
romans001
Joined: 06 Aug 2013 Posts: 41 Location: Slovakia
|
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
romans001 wrote:
examples, still did not have enough time to properly test different setting as many of you suggested, so hopefully for future, even better images will be produced. I think i will keed this lens, what do you think about following images. no post processing. only camera setting, sharp+1 contrast+1
i like how sharp distant forest looks on picture below, look for horizon, but i dont know, maybe they are so sharp because part of sky right over distat forest is burned, sodont know if the lens is sharp or its just because of contrast due to overexposed part of sky
200% crop
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1432
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
edited
Last edited by bernhardas on Thu Apr 28, 2016 1:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wuxiekeji
Joined: 15 Aug 2012 Posts: 213
|
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wuxiekeji wrote:
sichko wrote: |
Really ? Then what about this statement ...
Diffraction thus sets a fundamental resolution limit that is independent of the number of megapixels, or the size of the film format. It depends only on the f-number of your lens, and on the wavelength of light being imaged. |
Yes, as others said, it is the same but enlarged on APS-C images so it looks worse. For the same reason some lenses look sharper on FF than APS-C, it's because they outresolve FF sensor but not outresolve the pixel pitch of APS-C.
It's worth noting that it also depends on the specific design of lens being used. Some have the aperture iris slightly forward, some have it slightly back, and the shape also matters (diffraction is the reason you get stars from bright lights). _________________ Canon EOS 6D | Canon EOS 60D | Canon EOS-M | Voigtlander Nokton 1.4/35 | Zeiss Distagon C-Y 4/18 | Zeiss Distagon ZF 2/28 | Samyang 1.4/35 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/50 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/85 | Zeiss Makro-Planar C-Y 2.8/100 | Zeiss Sonnar C-Y 2.8/135 | Nikkor ED Ai-S 2.8/180 | Canon FD SSC Fluorite 2.8/300 | Tair-3S 4.5/300 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
romans001
Joined: 06 Aug 2013 Posts: 41 Location: Slovakia
|
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
romans001 wrote:
bernhardas wrote: |
The lens looks good. The second last one has a ghost and a bit of flare. That can sometimes not be avoided with ultra wide angle. Try to keep any direct light hitting the front lens as good as possible, if you want sharper pictures in that circumstances. |
thank you, appreciate, looking forward to hear from others what they think about this picture quality. i have no similar lens so i cant compare.
thanks! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
eddieitman
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 Posts: 1246 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
eddieitman wrote:
They look great, good pop and colour the one with both people in it and girl sat under tree, it looks like the tree will pop out of the picture _________________ My web site www.digital-darkroom.weebly.com
Life is like a camera. Focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives and if things don't work out, just take another shot. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
what is wrong with this lens?
looks very good to me. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
romans001
Joined: 06 Aug 2013 Posts: 41 Location: Slovakia
|
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
romans001 wrote:
thank you all for valuable feedback
its keeper for me now.
now "hunt" for 85mm could begin
take care |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|