Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: OT: Zooms and sharpness, was Website ref.



On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 19:29:04 +1100, you wrote:

>I think remarkably sharp images can be obtained from most 'consumer grade' 
>zooms *at their best aperture*.  I base that on viewing Kodachromes projected 
>to about 6ft across (using a very sharp Leitz lens for the projection.. :-)
>
>Sure, many 28-whatever zooms have questionable quality, but it is quite easy 
>to see when a slide is sharp and if it is, surely the tests are valid. 
>
>mt


I don't claim this to be "remarkably sharp," and besides you can't
tell much on the web, but this photo was taken with the lens that
people love to trash - the recent Canon EF 28-90mm  f/4-5.6 USM, which
came as the kit lens on my Elan 7.  .  I think it's even rated lower
than "consumer grade," like "entry level" or something, and I did
upgrade after a few months.  But in the meantime I got quite a few
pictures that I thought were "remarkably sharp" for a $100 lens.  

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=396423&size=lg

Of course I get *true* remarkable sharpness from my older Canon MF
lenses, most of which cost me less than $100!  But they are all fixed
focal length.  Nonetheless  the FD 35-105mm f/3.5 is supposed to be
very sharp. 

The point made above is very true about "best apertures."  I know of a
site that rates most of the Canon FD (MF) lenses at each of their
apertures, if anyone is interested contact me off-list.


Ken Durling



Photo.net portfolio: 

http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=402251




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.