Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-07-2016, 09:35 AM   #46
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,849
QuoteOriginally posted by SeattleDucks Quote
WOW!

And this is why I rarely get involved with photography gear forums, because there is always one or two folks who seem to relish being rude.

Take care all, I'm out.

Best,
Ross
Or maybe it's just you.

04-07-2016, 09:38 AM - 1 Like   #47
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,580
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
oh? do you have any pics to back up that claim? i think not
Have a look through my many photos on the post your photos shoots and see my ratio of small apertures. The largest I go is f/8. My last batch were f/8 but only to keep the shutter speed up, as though I was with a tripod I was on a heavily used bridge that vibrates when people run or walk on it. Plus I didn't have need of close things being pin sharp.

Also go to M Salon in Vienna and you will see more than 20 photos of mine in an exhibition and the shots there will be nearly all f/11 to f/16.

I have absolutely nothing to prove to a pixel peeper as that is not what photography is about. It isn't about specs, but about something that you can't put on a resolotion chart...

The thing I see too much on gear forums are people shooting with an f/1.2 and with an orgasmic cry shout: "Look at this it is wide open". Big whoops. You see a photo where nothing is actually pin sharp and the device of wide open hasn't been used for an aesthetic purpose but for the purpose of online willy waving.

Not for me, thank you.
04-07-2016, 09:56 AM   #48
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by itshimitis Quote
Also go to M Salon in Vienna and you will see more than 20 photos of mine in an exhibition and the shots there will be nearly all f/11 to f/16.
with what camera? because f/11-f/16 on mf does not have the same dof/diffraction problems as f/11-f/16 on ff... that's not pixel peeping either it's something that every photographer should know.

your claim was that there are multiple reasons why a lens should be stopped down well into the diffraction range, and that remains unsubstantiated.

but i'm trying to keep an open mind the only reason that i can see for hitting f/16 on ff is because of a foreground object that's way too close to the lens... or maybe to darken the image, when you don't have an nd filter, but that's questionable.
04-07-2016, 10:33 AM   #49
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Roi-et, Thailand
Posts: 773
Sony need to go so much further than the sensor. It can be the best sensor ever, but if it's in a "computer lens attachment device" rather than a really great to use camera . . .

04-07-2016, 10:38 AM   #50
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,243
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
fast glass doesn't have to be used wide open, that's a logical fallacy.

the priority is to get a lens that can take a landscape shot at a wider aperture: "Better image quality under larger aperture. IF a 35mm FF lens can be used at a larger aperture, everything you said will be canceled out."

modern fast glass has less vignetting and fewer aberrations all the way up thru f/5.6 at least, so it should always be evaluated for landscape shooting.
The point is that you are saying that full frame with high megapixels is better than medium format with fewer megapixels because faster glass is available for the full frame camera than for the medium format camera. But if you are shooting at f5.6 on full frame and f8 on medium format, then I really think using a f1.4 lens is probably wasted and going to give you a lot bigger piece of glass than you really need.
04-07-2016, 10:38 AM   #51
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 219
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
with what camera? because f/11-f/16 on mf does not have the same dof/diffraction problems as f/11-f/16 on ff... that's not pixel peeping either it's something that every photographer should know.

your claim was that there are multiple reasons why a lens should be stopped down well into the diffraction range, and that remains unsubstantiated.

but i'm trying to keep an open mind the only reason that i can see for hitting f/16 on ff is because of a foreground object that's way too close to the lens... or maybe to darken the image, when you don't have an nd filter, but that's questionable.
STOP HIJACKING THE THREAD. If you want to wonk out about this argument take it to PMs or start your own thread.
04-07-2016, 10:53 AM - 2 Likes   #52
Site Supporter
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,705
04-07-2016, 11:22 AM - 1 Like   #53
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 624
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
the priority is to get a lens that can take a landscape shot at a wider aperture: "[b]Better image quality under larger aperture. IF a 35mm FF lens can be used at a larger aperture, everything you said will be canceled out
Since when?

You'll find the odd chap who shoots landscapes wide open for some creative reason, but I would say that 99.9% of landscape users leave their camera on f/8-f/16 for dof and exposure time.

I don't know about you but one of the tricks to getting lovely colour in the sky late afternoon is to extend the exposure time, not shorten it. You could argue to then use NDs but why would you when the lens is performing best at f11 anyway.

All sounds odd to me.

04-07-2016, 11:29 AM   #54
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The point is that you are saying that full frame with high megapixels is better than medium format with fewer megapixels because faster glass is available for the full frame camera than for the medium format camera. But if you are shooting at f5.6 on full frame and f8 on medium format, then I really think using a f1.4 lens is probably wasted and going to give you a lot bigger piece of glass than you really need.
assuming that both lenses don't have problems like vignetting, field curvature, spherical aberrations, etc, i would agree... but asking for that with slow glass at wider apertures is far from certain.

anyway, that's not the scenario that people out here are posting.

"f/16-f/22" and "stop way down" is the overwhelming sentiment

---------- Post added 04-07-16 at 11:30 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by 2351HD Quote
Since when?

You'll find the odd chap who shoots landscapes wide open for some creative reason.
no one in this thread has ever advocated shooting landscapes wide open.

---------- Post added 04-07-16 at 11:52 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by 2351HD Quote
You could argue to then use NDs but why would you when the lens is performing best at f11 anyway.
no ff lens performs better at f/11, unless something is wrong with it; if nothing else, you are already into the range of visible diffraction by f/11... here is a list of lenses and their best tested apertures:

"None of the lenses performed any better after f/5.6 (for the center) or f/8 for the corners. Most were clearly getting softer at f/11."
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/11/stop-it-down-just-a-bit/

mf will behave the same way, when the actual dof(not the aperture number on the lens) is the same as f/11 on ff.
04-07-2016, 12:28 PM   #55
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,580
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
no ff lens performs better at f/11, unless something is wrong with it; if nothing else, you are already into the range of visible diffraction by f/11...
At which viewing distance?
04-07-2016, 03:13 PM - 2 Likes   #56
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 624
OSV, you said it, you said the priority is to get a lens that can take a landscape shot at a wider aperture.....

Any lens will perform better at F11 if it gives you the DOF that you need. There's no point having a sharp lens at f5.6 if you don't have the required depth of field.

I just don't see the point of your whole entire pitch here in this thread.
04-07-2016, 04:16 PM - 1 Like   #57
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,580
I will use the largest aperture that will give me the depth of field I need. It's all about 'acceptable sharpness' and this plays a part in all focussing techniques be they hyperfocal or otherwise. Sometimes foreground elements will mean you need the very smallest of apertures to get acceptable sharpness across the whole image. This may involve diffraction but then you decide whether you notice diffraction or out of focus areas most at the viewing distance you intend to go for. For real printed images forget 100%. I don't think many would pick out diffraction on a 40 x 30 inch image stood the right distance away from it. More might pick out areas that are out of focus.
04-07-2016, 06:18 PM   #58
Site Supporter
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,705
agree, i would rather have some negligible diffraction than to have entire elements out of focus due to insufficient DOF.
04-07-2016, 06:31 PM   #59
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,019
QuoteOriginally posted by itshimitis Quote
The thing I see too much on gear forums are people shooting with an f/1.2 and with an orgasmic cry shout: "Look at this it is wide open".
:LOL:
04-07-2016, 06:47 PM   #60
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by itshimitis Quote
At which viewing distance?
optical bench tests are done at infinity, imatest needs to have the chart close enough to fill the frame, no guarantees how it'll look with radical changes in distance.

ultimately, i think that you have to test it how it'll be used, the landscape pics that posted are how i test lenses, at all apertures.

so i know that the m28/3.5 has minimal field curvature at 100+ yards, it has a flat focus field, minimal ca, and i know the apertures that it's usable at.

i've also tested a couple of dozen other 28mm legacy lenses, standing at that exact same spot, focusing at the exact same target; no lens has been able to match it.

you've seen the pic, it looks decent on the right side even at 100%, but at extreme distances, the right side goes soft, depending on how far it was focused into the scene... got to test it how it'll be used.
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!
645d, 645z, aperture, camera, detail, dof, equivalent, f11, feet, ff, focus, frame, glass, landscapes, lens, lenses, love, medium format, print, prints, resolution, sensor, sony, source, switch
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
You soon-to-be K-1 owners are getting a Rolls Royce of a camera... BigMackCam Pentax DSLR Discussion 27 03-21-2016 08:43 PM
Tethering coming to a 645Z near you. GarethC7 Pentax Medium Format 41 10-21-2014 04:10 AM
Calling 645Z owners - testing dark frame behaviour Ed Hurst Pentax Medium Format 50 07-31-2014 05:28 PM
K3 vs Sony A7: which one will you buy for the same price? yusuf Pentax K-3 23 06-15-2014 07:46 AM
will you switch to SDHC cards? barondla Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 11-22-2006 04:14 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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