| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/10/2007 02:02:53 PM · #1 |
Just curious what you have found, especially with portrait work (ie. good balance of DOF (stil pleasingly shallow) and sharpness).
Message edited by author 2007-10-10 14:06:50. |
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:08:31 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by goinskiing:
Just curious what you have found, especially with portrait work (ie. good balance of DOF (stil pleasingly shallow) and sharpness). |
I did some simple tests with the 50/1.8 and found that f/1.8 and f/2.2 were much softer than the rest and then it evened out more after that. So if you want a combo of sharp and DOF bokeh I'd say start at f/2.5 and go from there.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:10:57 PM · #3 |
| I've noticed that the first few stops (f1.8, f2.0, and f2.2) have been quite soft on my copy. |
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:12:59 PM · #4 |
My impression for most lenses is that your best sharpness is a couple of stops from its widest aperture to a couple of stops short of its smallest aperture. Would this be a safe generalization? (as far generalizations go anyways).
|
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:14:37 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Citadel:
My impression for most lenses is that your best sharpness is a couple of stops from its widest aperture to a couple of stops short of its smallest aperture. Would this be a safe generalization? (as far generalizations go anyways). |
Yes. Except macro lenses tend to be very sharp wide open.
R.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:18:11 PM · #6 |
i find (i have the cheap and cheerful version, not the L glass) that te focus is crisp and lovely in closeups, to about 5 or 6 feet away, then it gets progressively softer the further the subject is away. i'm sure if i'd spent the extra $600 or so, i'd have crisp subjects no matter where they were...
i usually shoot with the aperture wide open, but i find even stopped all the way down that the lens is just a little soft for long distances. that's ok, for $120, i'm not complaining. |
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:27:04 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Citadel:
My impression for most lenses is that your best sharpness is a couple of stops from its widest aperture to a couple of stops short of its smallest aperture. Would this be a safe generalization? (as far generalizations go anyways). |
Yes. Except macro lenses tend to be very sharp wide open.
R. |
Still the case that the macro lenses are sharper stopped down a couple of stops from wide open though.
100mm f2.8 MTF chart. The blue is at f8. What is better about a macro is the generally flatter response
compared to the 50mm f1.8 II, which is still certainly at its sharpest around f8, too.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:39:31 PM · #8 |
photozone says 5.6 is as sharp as it gets
Message edited by author 2007-10-10 14:41:48. |
|
|
|
10/10/2007 02:44:41 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by xianart:
i usually shoot with the aperture wide open, but i find even stopped all the way down that the lens is just a little soft for long distances. that's ok, for $120, i'm not complaining. |
All lenses lose sharpness when stopped all the way down; it's due to diffraction from the very small aperture. Google "circle of confusion".
R.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 06:55:57 AM EST.
