[I put that one guy on hide. 300+ messages and all snide remarks. But if anyone normal thinks this is too annoying please do speak up. It\'s not my intention to annoy - only to learn.]
--
Thanks PSquared63 - Those are very topical and very helpful.
Grenache wrote:
Bifurcator,
I am not sure where you think the sharpness of bokeh is in your 100% crop. The entire image haze a haze about it that is not something that can be cleaned up well in post...this is something that different lenses will either have or lack.
As for sharpness, partly the haze and ghosting and partly just a lack of sharpness, there is not much going on here. This could be a product of lighting being sub par, because without shadow there can be no sharpness. I am just gusessing here, but were that taken with a dedicated macro lens or even a sharp lens on tubes, you would not only see crisp dust and fuzz flecks but also the crisp texture of the A/V component.
Compare your 100% to the sand shot...that one is all about sharpness.
I see what you mean. I guess sitting right in from of the scene I photographed my own mind was filling in the \"bokeh sharpness\" but yeah, I get that haze a lot in low light low contrast environments (scenes). OK, here\'s a sand comparison. First a size reference:
Here\'s a scaled version with no sharpening other than that added by the PS scaling type:
Shoe sand from my Mt. Fuji climb last year.
Yeah, I kept it.
And here\'s another with very light sharpening added prior to scaling. 0.4 pixels at 60%.
Wow! I think I zoomed a little too far in. . I thought he said \" 1:1 Elpro + APO 2X\" so I went to 200mm too. Isn\'t the Elpro a 100mm like the Leica 100mm APO macro in the title?
Keep in mind that the noise is a product of the sensor and lighting - the sharpening (0.4 pixels at 60%) I did brought that out a tiny bit more tho. I didn\'t apply any NR though because I didn\'t want to affect the lens blur. The sharpening wasn\'t enough to cause any edge lines that I could see on my monitors at 800% just a very slight amount of micro-contrast enhancement.
How about now? Are you seeing much of a difference between these shots and the shots from the other lens samples posted?
But maybe I should clarify for Wayne; I\'m not at all saying that my point and shoot is better. No not at all. I\'m saying one thing and asking one thing. I\'m saying that at 12% or 25% scale of the \"good lens\" images posted here and in other threads: I can not tell the difference between them and a good P&S shot. And I\'m asking (in order to learn) what attributes make these \"good\" lenses good and wanting to see the differences by example. And if I can get people to be aware that 12% scales show nothing meaningful and to regularly add 100% crops in the process then that I\'ll be a very happy camper. This isn\'t just my opinion though. Every lens review I read always expresses the absolute necessity for 100% samples.
Grenache wrote:
P.S. The reason in part why you see small images posted here is that many of us earn income from our photography and we have no desire to be ripped off. Although small images and good post processing can hide some sins of lenses, the tonal quality of the images - of you know what to look for - is a character of the lens that does not easily get scuttled. Could be the lighting, but I see limited tonal detail in your shot. Most of the scene looks quite flat.
Yeah I think it\'s the lighting and contrast of the natural scene - mostly. Hopefully these samples will be better. But on the 100% thing I of course am not asking for larger frames nor full frame 100% versions. But a small 800x600 (or similar) 100% crop that shows some desirable or undesirable qualities would make these kinds of threads actually useful to folks like me trying to figure out exactly what the lens is actually like. If the images are just being posted as celebrations of ownership and not lens samples then that\'s cool and I wouldn\'t expect 100% crops. I guess I could figure out which are which - especially if the text reflects the case.
Feb 13, 2010 at 02:34 PM
Previous versions of Bifurcator's message #8129003 « Leica 100mm APO macro - hard to beat »
. I thought he said \" 1:1 Elpro + APO 2X\" so I went to 200mm too. Isn\'t the Elpro a 100mm like the Leica 100mm APO macro in the title? 
