On lens quality & getting the best image.... Copied this from another forum I'm on as the info is so pertinent to getting the best image... "According to John B. Williams's book "Image...

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Copied this from another forum I'm on as the info is so pertinent to getting the best image...

"According to John B. Williams's book "Image Clarity"(1990
ISBN 0-240-80033-8), given a system of camera, film and lens capable of
100 lines/mm resolution under ideal conditions: In the hands of a total
beginner with no photographic training at all it will deliver 5-10
lines/mm. A moderately experienced amateur who knows how to grip and
operate the camera smoothly will achieve about 20 lines/mm. A very
experienced photographer using *perfect hand held technique* and faster
shutter speeds can, at best, achieve about 40 lines/mm. Finally, using
a tripod and perfect technique it will be possible to achieve about 80
lines/mm... but not on every shot. Note that this book predates digital
and image stabilization in lens or body. Nevertheless, you can still
see that the photographer's technique is still the limiting factor
unless the lens is pure junk."

TheDman Loc: USA

I think that info is pure junk. You can't make blanket statements like that, and if it can only reach 80 lines/mm with perfect tripod technique, then that is it's maximum. It never was a 100 lines/mm lens to begin with.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Believe what you want....Do you have any source to refute the authors statement ?

TheDman wrote:

I think that info is pure junk. You can't make blanket statements like that, and if it can only reach 80 lines/mm with perfect tripod technique, then that is it's maximum. It never was a 100 lines/mm lens to begin with.

lightchime Loc: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

Screamin Scott wrote:

Believe what you want....Do you have any source to refute the authors statement ?

Actually, the problem would seem that the author of the article has not listed sources for his statements.

It is like the statement: 90% of statistics are made up on the spot. One has to ask, what is the original research to provide proof.

naturepics43 Loc: Hocking Co. Ohio - USA

TheDman wrote:

I think that info is pure junk. You can't make blanket statements like that, and if it can only reach 80 lines/mm with perfect tripod technique, then that is it's maximum. It never was a 100 lines/mm lens to begin with.

I think your missing the point of the OP. The 100 lines/mm was done in a laboratory setting under near perfect conditions. The 80 lines/mm on tripod were less than perfect conditions.

anotherview Loc: California

This kind of posting prompts this response: Stop arguing about photography. Learn to do photography, and then do photography.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

He listed the book as the source... I'm sure if you got a copy of the book, sources would be identified...

lightchime wrote:

Actually, the problem would seem that the author of the article has not listed sources for his statements.

It is like the statement: 90% of statistics are made up on the spot. One has to ask, what is the original research to provide proof.

TheDman Loc: USA

Screamin Scott wrote:

Believe what you want....Do you have any source to refute the authors statement ?

Does he have Amy source to back up his own? Burden of proof is on him. I know that my hands holding technique hadn't gotten any better since i was a total beginner. Even then, i knew cameras had to be held still.

TheDman Loc: USA

naturepics43 wrote:

I think your missing the point of the OP. The 100 lines/mm was done in a laboratory setting under near perfect conditions. The 80 lines/mm on tripod were less than perfect conditions.

None of that is stated anywhere.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

You want proof ? Go to the library & check out the book, or else buy a copy... This info was taken from the book he referenced

TheDman wrote:

Does he have Amy source to back up his own? Burden of proof is on him. I know that my hands holding technique hadn't gotten any better since i was a total beginner. Even then, i knew cameras had to be held still.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Get the book, read it & then come back & dispute anything you want...

TheDman wrote:

None of that is stated anywhere.

TheDman Loc: USA

Screamin Scott wrote:

You want proof ? Go to the library & check out the book, or else buy a copy... This info was taken from the book he referenced

Well if it was in a book then it must be true! Lol

Anytime who makes blanket statements like "all beginners can't hold cameras still" is full of crap, and i can guarantee you they don't have any research study backing that up. Anyone should be able to see that as total nonsense.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Well, if you posted your opinion here, It Must Be True !!! How ridiculous is that ?... You haven't read the book, yet you know it's bogus? Oh BTW, show me your research backing up your claim while you are at it...Talk is cheap...

TheDman Loc: USA

Screamin Scott wrote:

Well, if you posted your opinion here, It Must Be True !!! How ridiculous is that ?... You haven't read the book, yet you know it's bogus? Oh BTW, show me your research backing up your claim while you are at it...Talk is cheap...

I know the statements you posted are bogus. They're the same as saying "all people like strawberry ice cream". Do you think that's true? Blanket statements rarely are.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Screamin Scott wrote:

Copied this from another forum I'm on as the info ... (show quote)

I don't think that merely holding the camera motionless isthe mark of pro vs a first timer. Give some one who has never used a camera before a point and shooter and he can shoot perfectly sharp bad photos. If I remember correctly lines per MM was the way of judging both lenses and film in the old days. And that those parameters were independent of the shooter. One more thing. Holding anything perfectly motionless even with a tripod is phtsically not possible weather it is under laboratory conditions or in the field.