It is the lens that experiences diffraction. All of them do. And the
resolution values are *theoretical* maximums. Actual performance is
probably less.
Chuck Norcutt
C.H.Ling wrote:
> The blur index of 50/2 is actually increasing from F4 that means resolution
> is reducing. You better look at dpreview for easier understanding of the
> actual performance, its resolution is reduced to half at F16 that means
> could only resolve ~4MP.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_50_2_o20/page3.asp
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Irisarri"
>
> Hi Chuck,
>
> I am not an engineer and I don´t really understand this complex
> technical data so I apologize if I am reporting something wrong but I
> remember reading this in slrgear about E-510 and Zuiko Digital 50 f2.
>
> Sharpness
> Looking at the blur graph, the lens is incredibly sharp: it barely
> surpasses one blur unit at ƒ/2, and by ƒ/4 it produces images as sharp
> as our scale can detect. This sharpness trend continues all the way to
> ƒ/16, where diffraction limiting starts to set in. By ƒ/22, the lens
> still produces fantastic results, registering just over 2 on our blur
> scale. Some lens owners would be content to see the kind of performance
> you see at ƒ/22 at more commonly used apertures such as ƒ/8. Overall,
> absolutely superb performance.
>
> Do you think E-3 is diffraction limited?
>
> http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/35/cat/all
>
> Warmest regards,
>
> David
>
> Chuck Norcutt escribió:
>> Nothing to do with color but aperture is certainly a consideration with
>> pixel density of the E3. Diffraction will begin to limit E1 resolution
>> at apertures smaller than f/8. An E3 will be diffraction limited at
>> apertures smaller than about f/5.6. It's not that you can't shoot the
>> E3 at f/8 but if you do the resolution limits will be closer to the E1.
>>
>> There should be nothing you can set in the camera that will affect raw
>> development unless you're accepting the conversion using the parameters
>> that would have been used if the camera had made a JPEG. If I were home
>> I'd say send me one and let me convert it for you to see what I could do
>> in ACR. But the only computer I've got at the moment is the "Krappy
>> Kolor" laptop.
>>
>> Now that I'm thinking about it I'm wondering if diffraction can in fact
>> have an effect on color. Diffracted beams don't go where they're
>> intended. Check color for shots of f/5.6 or wider vs. f/8 or smaller.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> Ian W wrote:
>>
>>> Last night I was looking through my pictures with my wife (using
>>> irfanview) and we came to the conclusion that they were better colour,
>>> sharpness and in some other unexplained way than ones taken with the
>>> E-3, not much but enough to notice has anyone else found this.
>>>
>>> maybe its to do with aperture and its raw development or maybe it's some
>>> in camera setting I have wrongly set.
>>>
>>> has anyone else found this?
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|