Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Quote:Well, I can't look inside. I can only rate a lens from a user perspective.
The FEs are all pretty impressive within that framework.
I should also mention that I have yet to see a significant centering error in one of the FEs.
I understand that well, I was just not clear on what JoJu was saying...
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Quote:Peak performance is around F/4.
As pixel count increases, soon it will be at F2.8 
That is diffraction for you.
Posts: 1,340
Threads: 55
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
Is that a bad thing? Implicitly, why would it be better to be sensor limited than lens limited?
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
Posts: 442
Threads: 25
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
1
I'm old school. Used to take landscape at F8 and get good depth of field and sharpness.
Soon we'll have to choose big depth of field <b>or</b> sharpness.
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Quote:I'm old school. Used to take landscape at F8 and get good depth of field and sharpness.
Soon we'll have to choose big depth of field <b>or</b> sharpness.
No, you don't. It is not the sensors doing anything, except showing more and more what the optics do. So, if you now get sharp big prints, you will get sharp big prints in future too. The only thing higher resolution sensors do is allow you to zoom in even more on the image projected by the lens. Not something normal to do in normal photography, looking at images with a magnifying glass... It is about the image.
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Rover, I thought you had a Canon camera? Am I mistaken? I don't recall a 16mp model.
