MFlenses - A new life in a digital age
MFLenses 2026

Manual Focus Lenses Forum

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.
logovectorizer.com
Spotlight

Featured partner placement for the forum front page.

Sharpening
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  


Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:01 pm
Post subject: Sharpening
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:01 pm
Post subject: Sharpening
Reply
I notice many samples with the proud claim "no sharpening" and the assumption that this means the picture demonstrates how sharp the lens is. This is probably correct for film takers, but not for digital sensors. Virtually all sensors have anti-aliasing filters, and one of the by-products of this is to "blur" the picture. When a camera produces a jpeg, the internal software applies sharpening as part of the algorithm, and the strength is often controllable. For RAW, the user must compensate for the blurring by applying some degree of sharpening during processing (I deliberately did not use the phrase "PP"). Can we all agree to be rather more precise when using this claim of "no sharpening"? Bear in mind the sharpening does not create extra pixels or detail, it basically adjusts micro-contrast in a variety of ways, and can easily become just too much, with obvious artifacts. "No sharpening applied" is often very mis-leading by its implication that a good lens does not require sharpening, which is simply not true in the digital world.


patrickh


Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:10 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:10 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Very true Patrick.
I think that when people writes "no sharpening" they really mean "no PP sharpening".
Which however does not say much anyway because usually digital cameras offer different levels of in-camera sharpening (if you take JPGs)
and RAW programs usually are not set to zero sharpening by default (if you take RAWs).
I think that if someone has the goal of testing lenses, he should adopt a standard and always go with it.
For instance, leaving his camera's sharpening or his RAW program's sharpening always at the same level.
This will not ensure results that are comparable with photos taken by other photographers, but at least will ensure that the
results obtain by that same photographer are comparable (until he changes camera, that is... Laughing )


Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 5:30 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 5:30 pm
Post subject:
Reply
...or changes PP routine.

After resizing I always do a .2 pix ~6-10 radius (not critical) @ 180% regardless of original source.
With home scans, I usually do ~3 - 3.4 pix ~34-40 radius (not critical, though at least 10X the sharpening pixels) @ 76 or 80% (percentages picked due to high school and college graduation years). This low frequency sharpening helps my scanner Wink


At least 'no sharpening' isn't like people who say 'cheap film' Very Happy


Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 8:08 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 8:08 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Patrick wrote:
"No sharpening applied" is often very mis-leading by its implication that a good lens does not require sharpening, which is simply not true in the digital world

you cannot generalize with 'simply not true', each dslr is different
the Leica or the Fuji X-Pro1 doesn't have filter, Fuji have changed the layout of the sensor to suppress moire, Leica use optional filter
Canon & Nikon have models with no or weaker filter
it is possible to remove the filter on most sensor
new Canon DLO software is able to recover softness of the filter
Canon wrote:
The EOS 5D Mark III comes with Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP) v3.11 software to enable high-speed, high quality processing of RAW images. DPP v3.11 includes a new Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO) tool that is designed to improve image resolution. DLO imitates lens performance, with a series of mathematical functions replicating each stage of the journey of light through the optical path. Using this information DLO can correct a range of typical optical aberrations and loss of resolution caused by a camera’s low pass filter, by applying an inverse function to each shot to take the image nearer to how the scene appears to the naked eye. This creates detailed, high-quality images with manageable file sizes, providing photographers with maximum image quality and greater flexibility


Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 11:11 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 11:11 pm
Post subject:
Reply
poilu

You are correct, I should have been less strident and said "often" rather than my absolute statement. I suspect that 90% or more of the digital cameras used in this forum have some form of anti-aliasing. I stand by my cry to be much more cautious about using the "no sharpening" claim to enhance a lens' claimed sharpness though. Smile Embarassed

patrickh


Post
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:09 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:09 am
Post subject:
Reply
I don't like that claim and so I don't make any comments on sharpening. I have a default value set in ACR that I use 99% of the time and use high pass filter to sharpen sometimes.
Post new topic Reply to topic
Page 1 of 1