I need some help....PLEASE!
Aug 17, 2012 10:43:32 #
Just double checked the MTF data on the Nikon lens. It is sharper than the Canon lens. Also something to note about sharpness is that lenses change there sharpness as you zoom in and out. They all vary. some are sharpest in the 24mm, some mid, some at 70mm. when sharpness is critical you need to know where the exact settings are sharpest for your particular lens and camera.
Aug 17, 2012 10:44:06 #
Correct, and it's much worse at any given f stop with crop frame cameras than with full frame cameras. I have good lenses and they all go soft at f22 on my crop frame camera.
Nikonian72 wrote:
This phenomenon is known as circular aperture diffraction, aka lens diffraction. This is a problem with all lasers, and with digital photography through small apertures (usually noticeable at f/22). Associated terms: Airy's Disc & circle of confusion.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/cirapp.html
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/diffraction.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/cirapp.html
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/diffraction.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml
Aug 17, 2012 10:46:26 #
Hi. Didn't read the whole discussion but consider the other photographer may've had in-camera settings adjusted for best results using a tiny aperture (f/22). Newer digital cameras allow a setting for sharpness and for increased noise reduction.
Generally speaking, however, a setting of ISO 100 should produce images with little or no visible noise, except maybe in the very darkest areas of the image. This artifact one may remove in Adobe Camera Raw with the Luminance slider under Noise Reduction.
Diffraction of light passing through the lens optics occurs as a matter of the physical properties of photons and their behaviors under given conditions. Your photographer friend cannot manipulate the laws of physics but could compensate for their visual effect.
I suggest you ask your photographer friend for all the settings he used, including any additional information that applies to his results. This way, you and others will minimize their speculation.
Generally speaking, however, a setting of ISO 100 should produce images with little or no visible noise, except maybe in the very darkest areas of the image. This artifact one may remove in Adobe Camera Raw with the Luminance slider under Noise Reduction.
Diffraction of light passing through the lens optics occurs as a matter of the physical properties of photons and their behaviors under given conditions. Your photographer friend cannot manipulate the laws of physics but could compensate for their visual effect.
I suggest you ask your photographer friend for all the settings he used, including any additional information that applies to his results. This way, you and others will minimize their speculation.
jimberton wrote:
i went to a live seminar a few weeks ago on produc... (show quote)
Prison Building, Alcatraz Island (2010)
Aug 17, 2012 10:46:59 #
jackm1943 wrote:
Correct, and it's much worse at any given f stop w... (show quote)
yep, my 7d is a crop sensor....but isnt the d7000 a crop sensor also?
Aug 17, 2012 10:47:41 #
Since I have a degree in Quantum physics, this has been a fun read for me. I spent a lot of time working on the bending of light at the photon level. O.k., big deal. But I have never bothered to think about this situation with a camera. I have been truly enlightened. Nikonian72 is good. He has always been very helpful. His links, when I read them, were just common sense to me.
But now my curiosity has got me going. I own the Sony equivalent of a Nikon d7000. I have a Sony a580. Same sensor. I also have the Minolta lens equivalent which has always been an excellent lens for me. My problem is that I do not have any strobes; just a bounce flash. But since lighting is lighting, I can arrange for that in different ways in order to duplicate this project. It will be interesting to see my results at F22.
One thing that I already know is that just because one brand of camera can do a certain thing at a certain setting, and another brand does that same thing at different settings, does not rationally constitute jumping ship for the other brand. There are too many variables between brands no matter how subtle that would skew any results.
I also think that this thread has been one of the better discussions out here in a while. This should help a lot of us get a better understanding of how our cameras work.
But now my curiosity has got me going. I own the Sony equivalent of a Nikon d7000. I have a Sony a580. Same sensor. I also have the Minolta lens equivalent which has always been an excellent lens for me. My problem is that I do not have any strobes; just a bounce flash. But since lighting is lighting, I can arrange for that in different ways in order to duplicate this project. It will be interesting to see my results at F22.
One thing that I already know is that just because one brand of camera can do a certain thing at a certain setting, and another brand does that same thing at different settings, does not rationally constitute jumping ship for the other brand. There are too many variables between brands no matter how subtle that would skew any results.
I also think that this thread has been one of the better discussions out here in a while. This should help a lot of us get a better understanding of how our cameras work.
Aug 17, 2012 10:57:24 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
This phenomenon is known as circular aperture diffraction, aka lens diffraction. This is a problem with all lasers, and with digital photography through small apertures (usually noticeable at f/22). Associated terms: Airy's Disc & circle of confusion.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/cirapp.html
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/diffraction.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/cirapp.html
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/diffraction.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml
Thanks dude!
Aug 17, 2012 11:03:41 #
Nikonian72 I totally agree Jimberton indicated he got awesome shots by changing the fstop but he is willing to get rid of his camera and equipment because someone else used a different fstop.
Jimberton how much do you want for the camera?
Jimberton how much do you want for the camera?
Aug 17, 2012 11:08:19 #
If your pictures are as good at f5.6 as his were at f22 then what's the problem. could the difference be in the printers uses?
Aug 17, 2012 11:09:15 #
jimberton wrote:
i went to a live seminar a few weeks ago on produc... (show quote)
How about e-mailing the instructor requesting his explaination?
Aug 17, 2012 11:17:08 #
This has been an interesting discussion. I know each camera has their strong points. I too, will be interested in seeing these results.
Aug 17, 2012 11:17:15 #
How about e-mailing the instructor requesting his explanation?[/quote]
I have enjoyed this discussion too and am curious if the instructor is available for his take on the problem? I am hoping that if you paid for his class than he should be willing to help the participants. At least that has been my experience for any continuing ed classes that I have had.
Good luck and keep us posted. I am hopeful you don't need to ditch Canon over something like this.
I have enjoyed this discussion too and am curious if the instructor is available for his take on the problem? I am hoping that if you paid for his class than he should be willing to help the participants. At least that has been my experience for any continuing ed classes that I have had.
Good luck and keep us posted. I am hopeful you don't need to ditch Canon over something like this.
Aug 17, 2012 11:26:13 #
By training and interest I am a Laser Physicist, although I am now teaching Physics, and am finding this thread fascinating. I did not realize that f22 approached diffraction limiting or introduced diffraction effects. Have several enlarging lenses that get to f45. Wonder what would happen with them on a camera. When I get back from vacation, will try to find out.
Aug 17, 2012 11:28:20 #
architct wrote:
Nikonian72 I totally agree Jimberton indicated he got awesome shots by changing the fstop but he is willing to get rid of his camera and equipment because someone else used a different fstop.
Jimberton how much do you want for the camera?
Jimberton how much do you want for the camera?
hahahahahaa........my statement was made because the photo from his nikon was unbelievably sharp and beautiful......beyond the topic of f stops, i just want to be able to take a photo like that.....and there was no post processing.
i guess i cannot believe in my heart of hearts that that nikon could be THAT much better than my canon. if it is..it is.
what i am doing is trying to get the absolute best photo that i can get. i need to do this within the next 22 months...because i am retiring and i will have no money!!! hahahahahah
but seriously, this photo has the clarity and look of what my photography goal has been from the start.
all my clients have been more thannhappy with anything i have taken for them, but if there's something i can get within my budget to be 100% pleasing to me, i will try it.
not saying i am really going to dump my canon stuff......i just may end up with a nikon as my first camera and the 7d as a second...not for sure..............i need to see the results.
Aug 17, 2012 11:29:53 #
kristinelogan wrote:
How about e-mailing the instructor requesting his explanation?
I have enjoyed this discussion too and am curious if the instructor is available for his take on the problem? I am hoping that if you paid for his class than he should be willing to help the participants. At least that has been my experience for any continuing ed classes that I have had.
Good luck and keep us posted. I am hopeful you don't need to ditch Canon over something like this.[/quote]
i don't have his email.....but i will try to get it. i know he's from marquette, mi and i will get hold of him even if i have to drive over there.
Aug 17, 2012 11:34:57 #
Dennis wrote:
If your pictures are as good at f5.6 as his were at f22 then what's the problem. could the difference be in the printers uses?
printers don't create camera noise...and he had a hp cheapo photo printer.
the problem is why can't i go above f11 and get close to the same quality as he got from f22?
i know, i know i should be satisfied that i can get really close quality at 5.6 or 8 or 10
on a camera and lenses...i do not care about the bells and whistles that come out on every new thing............the only thing i care about is the quality of the photo......and i would like to posess the best possible quality equipment that my current financial state can handle.
and more than anything.....even over the equipment.......is that this has turned into a riddle that needs answers.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.