>
> Yes, I considered the point.
> But I know of no other 'shootout' like this one ... I seem to remember
> another site I visited through a link posted here, but failed to
> bookmark it.
>
Although I agree with Moose's point on principle, in actual practice using a
digital camera (even a crop sensor) is a good way of identifying what a lens
is capable of. You might not be able to see the corners in the crop-sensor
camera, but at least the center region is measurable. I have absolutely no
problem with a digital camera being used for lens testing.
Except: There are certain lenses which exceed the resolution threshold of
the sensors. These give you no clue what the maximum sharpness of the lens
is, but all you know for sure is that it is sharper than what the sensor is
able to reproduce.
In nearly every case now, if the lens is able to sharply resolve in the
digital world it will be sharp in the film world. If it is fuzzy in the
digital world, it may or may not be sharp in the film world. If it is sharp
in the film world, it may or may not be sharp in the digital world.
Digital sensors have an AA filter, but generally it is only causing a couple
pixels of gaussian blur. All films exhibit some form lateral-halation (not
halitosis) and the blur is typically not just one or two pixels like
digital, but up to 10 pixels in the scan. That, however, is very film
specific.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|