Originally posted by Marc Langille Interesting statement - would having them closer together for comparison to one another help?
Regards,
Marc
The crops of the eyes are a smaller area than your pics. Also, lighting, exposure, f-stops. etc. are probably all mixed. Only a side by side of same subject, same distance, same lighting, and with the same exposure would truly tell the difference.
I took a portrait yesterday with the F 50mm 1.4 and feel it's a sharper image than the one you posted of the young girl. I can pick out better skin texture and tiny hairs on the skin. Your skin looks slightly softer. Unfortunately, I'm pretty private about my pics and rarely post them. You'll have to take my word!
Also, in malakola's 2nd shot with the 50mm, it looks as though focus could have been on her hand, as it's closer to the lens, and the face was a tad soft. Or, she was slightly moving when he snapped it, resulting in a softer eye crop.
Originally posted by danielchtong I second that
While sharpness is part of whole picture, I would consider my F50mmF1.7 fairly sharp even at F2 with very little DoF
Daniel
Yes, an impressive shot and lens. Stunning model. The F 1.4 is supposed to be a tad sharper than the 1.7, so imagine that.
Originally posted by pcarfan The sharpest resolution figures measured for a current Pentax AF lens is that of the Pentax 43mm limited at F4, PERIOD.
However, the contrast, CA, bokeh, and IQ wide open also play into it's overall performance. You can't just go by "sharpest at f4". While this lens hasn't been tested on Photodo, I don't think it would score a 4.6, which is FA 85mm and f 50mm territory. It got an awful test result wide open on Photozone.
Originally posted by lithos Carl Zeiss T* f2 45mm Planar, for the Contax G series.
That lens is sharp. Very sharp. Exceedingly sharp. Obsidian-ly sharp. Tim Page lent me a G2 with the Planar, and, holy crap:
I'm not going to argue that the 45mm Planar is perhaps
THE sharpest 35mm lens on the planet.