To a certain extent, chuck, I agree with you, but I can certainly see
the presence or absence of
many optical aberrations in a 0.66MP image. Basically, if an
abberation shows with a size of one pixel
in this resolution, it would be visible to some extent, and does give
a fair representation.
For example, if I took that shot with my 21mm F2 wide open, the coma
would be *more than* visible
in the corners, i.e. would span several pixels. So thought it's
unscientific at best, it does give
a certain indication nevertheless.
Of course, the other reason for my post is to perhaps lure some
members here to post higher-resolution
images shot on film, for examination :-)
On 22 Feb 2011, at 3:10 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> That's a great shot and clearly taken with a great lens but there's no
> way you can evaluate "resolving power" from a 0.66 MP image.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 2/22/2011 1:52 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
>> Have a look at this post:
>>
>> http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1554718&postcount=1294
>>
>> It's, of course, a small web image, but the person claims it to be
>> shot wide
>> open, and to my eyes, the resolving power and freedom of coma looks
>> really,
>> really good right into the corners. If this was shot on fine-grained
>> film, it
>> looks like it could happily print quite big!
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|