Comments on: “This Lens Is Soft” and Other Facts

By: LeadWrist

LeadWrist — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:22:23 +0000

It’s always fun to go back an reread some articles, this one in particular. With Nikon and Canon pushing beyond 30+MPs I think we will start seeing HD lenses come out to drawn us of more $$.

By: Al

Al — Wed, 16 May 2012 19:52:29 +0000

It is so funny reading this now… and also reading at how so many previously top lenses performing badly on the new 36MP D800 and D800e.

quote: ” I suspect the full-frame manufacturers are going to call a halt at 30 Mpix or so, just because there’s no sense in it: they’re already out-resolving the quality control of their best lenses.”

By: New 7D has back-focussing issues

New 7D has back-focussing issues — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 18:25:31 +0000

[...] 347 times Um Derrel you're argument is totally one sided and slanted totally against Canon. You seem to be ignoring the fact that many camera companies have services setup for professionals for which they get discounted services – such as a full body+lens calibration. Furthermore you seem to be ignoring the fact that increasing your number of produced products increases the chances for calibration tolerance conflicts within the market – this is true for nikon, canon – heck any camera brand. You also appear to be putting great stock in web complaints against canon but ignoring those from nikon whilst also totally ignoring the much bigger number of people who are not complaining because their gear works. so since I'm not sure what your on about, save anti-canon marketing I'll just post this from Lens Rentals LensRentals.com – “This Lens Is Soft” and Other Facts [...]

By: ProfHankD

ProfHankD — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 03:59:49 +0000

Another excellent article. I’ve been studying PSF (Point Spread Functions) of lenses in my research, and I can confirm that minor but detectable decentering, flaws in aspheric surfaces, etc. are par for the course. I do not see decentering in old manual-focus lenses — mechanical tolerances seem to have been tighter before autofocus.

The real hope is computational photography technology, which may be able to create better images despite “insufficient” mechanical tolerances….

By: tlinn

tlinn — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:53:12 +0000

Another enlightening article, Roger. Thanks for taking the time to put it together.

Tim

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 15:56:19 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Randy

Randy — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 04:01:57 +0000

Thank you for this excellent piece. I wish every “fan” who says “All my (red ring/gold letter) lenses are spectacular but of course I don’t photograph brick walls” would read it. I’m not sure I get the distinction you make with wide angles–that they are not necessarily more trouble prone yet it is easier to see their flaws. I think the real problem is the reverse. It is possible to make a really great wide angle but once you use a 14-24 or 17TS it’s difficult to live with the performance of a 17-40.

By: sx210is

sx210is — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 23:16:22 +0000

I enjoyed visiting your website. Is there a better camera than the sx210is without going to a full DSLR

By: I Have A Bad Copy Of Lens X | Motivation

I Have A Bad Copy Of Lens X | Motivation — Wed, 18 May 2011 16:59:08 +0000

[...] is a really interesting read. Check out “This Lens Is Soft And Other Facts” here. Tags: [...]

By: Marian Kostadinov

Marian Kostadinov — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:27:54 +0000

It is worth noticing that wide angle lenses are more prone to front and back focus. The same holds for the standard zooms (like 18-XX) in their wider focal lengths. The reason for that is that smaller changes in lens to focal plane distances lead to bigger relative changes in the focusing distance. That can be easily calculated from the standard optical formula that we learn at school.