Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-03-2008, 08:41 AM   #46
Site Supporter
ChipB's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Austin, TX area
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,517
And to further confuse the subjectiveness of "sharpness", some lens manufacturers offer lenses that are purposely designed to be "soft" - so if a "soft" lens has the main subject in focus, is it "sharp"????

04-03-2008, 08:43 AM   #47
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by ChipB Quote
And to further confuse the subjectiveness of "sharpness", some lens manufacturers offer lenses that are purposely designed to be "soft" - so if a "soft" lens has the main subject in focus, is it "sharp"????

its weird, but you can have a sharp soft focus lens... hahaha

i found out by accident that the Zenitar 16mm exhibits such a tendancy at F2.8

its hard to explain, but everything has a halo around it, but at the same time detail is preserved...

(here is the original: http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p278338912.jpg)

04-03-2008, 08:46 AM   #48
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Posts: 377
sharpness is definitively NOT SUBJECTIVE



Every medium has a resolution limit, maximum sharpness/detail = max resolution.

What is subjective is the acceptable amount of sharpness, the tolerance.

Back to topic folks!
04-03-2008, 08:47 AM   #49
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by ricardobeat Quote


Every medium has a resolution limit, maximum sharpness/detail = max resolution.

Stay on topic folks!
tell that to someone with bad eyesight...

04-03-2008, 08:56 AM   #50
Veteran Member
aegisphan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 815
Soft lens has the halo/glowing effect, that I dislike. The subject is definitely not sharp. But for portrait work, sharp is not unnecessary.

Here is what I think is sharp at f/2.5:

Original:



100% Crop:



I tend to shoot at wide open so to really demonstrate what's sharp, I probably need to stop down more.
04-03-2008, 09:03 AM   #51
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
.


Very cool photo Gooshin.


.
04-03-2008, 09:28 AM   #52
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
.


Very cool photo Gooshin.


.
seconded. And I thought the zenitar was really dreamy at f2.8, thats a lot better than shots I have seen from it at f2.8. works fine for me
04-03-2008, 11:56 AM   #53
Senior Member
ukbluetooth's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 189
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
.


Very cool photo Gooshin.


.
Great photo - reminds me of the 60's when, for some inexplicable reason, the door frame (on the left) might really look like that.

04-03-2008, 12:51 PM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
I think that my daughter is sharp in the photo Hotdog Roadtrip and the church is quite sharp too, albeit very shrinked here.

Flickr: Photos from zewrak

All taken with the Sigma. However, I am a newbie, so don't be harsh on the quality . The images are sharp to me though.
04-03-2008, 01:00 PM   #55
Senior Member
ukbluetooth's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 189
Original Poster
Nice atmosphere - like them
04-03-2008, 04:41 PM   #56
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,142
QuoteOriginally posted by ChipB Quote
And to further confuse the subjectiveness of "sharpness", some lens manufacturers offer lenses that are purposely designed to be "soft" - so if a "soft" lens has the main subject in focus, is it "sharp"????
Pentax built a couple of soft lenses. The way they work is that there is a small aperture in the center of the lens, surrounded by additional smaller aperture holes. As you open the lens aperture up, more of the outside ring of holes comes in to play, producing an out of focus glow around a sharp, in focus, image.

If you want to experiment with this sort of thing without spending your hard earned cash, get an inexpensive clear or UV filter for a lens in the portrait range of focal lengths. Grab a jar of "petroleum jelly". Leaving the center of the filter clean, smear some of the jelly around the outside edge of the filter. This is not quite as elegant as the soft focus lens, but does a very close imitation of it. It's also messier.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
judge, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this as sharp as it should be? Todd Adamson Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 29 11-03-2010 01:34 AM
Nature Sharp enough? christophleipzig Photo Critique 5 10-16-2010 01:40 AM
Is the 16-50mm sharp enough? lbenac Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 03-09-2009 03:04 AM
Sharp enough? bsierens Photo Critique 12 11-07-2008 04:53 AM
16-45 versus 20-35 - better sharp? platinum Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 07-01-2008 02:19 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:15 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top