MichaelErlewine wrote:
I find this MTF Chart helpful.
We had this conversation on another forum. Since this is poor poor quality AI generated content, full of false assesments that are not supported by the claimed underlying data, you should remove it also from here.
People on this thread, beware - the initial post was AI generated, it’s not an MTF chart, as stated initially, it’s meant as a summary based on MTF data, but if you look at the actual MTFs, you’ll find a completely different story (and to “add insult to the injury” even a lot of the links result in a “page not found” message).
RustyBug wrote:
Harkens back to the photo rag days ... the magazines used similar terminology to group attributes.
The terminology was rooted in objective data reference criteria, but of course wasn't the same as an MTF, just an easy / summary comp read.
The problem is that the “easy summary” made by AI in the initial post is simply (and visibly, once you actually spend time with those original MTF graphs + lenses) wrong in relation to the underlying data/ MTF charts it claims to “summarize”.
nazdravanul wrote:
The problem is that the “easy summary” made by AI in the initial post is simply (and visibly, once you actually spend time with those original MTF graphs + lenses) wrong in relation to the underlying data/ MTF charts it claims to “summarize”.
I wasn't speaking to the accuracy / validity of the chart as presented ... just the remembrance of days gone by.
