Jump to content
Paulstw

QC Fail - Having a change of heart.

Recommended Posts

Basic stuff if people know/find out about it sure. Everyone has to learn - and for stock QC is no bad teacher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

km

However, every lens does have a "sweet spot." Most lenses are not as sharp wide open as they are closed down a couple of f-stops. Lens tests usually indicate that diffraction starts setting in at around f/11. Personally, though, I never notice it in my own photos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, every lens does have a "sweet spot." Most lenses are not as sharp wide open as they are closed down a couple of f-stops. Lens tests usually indicate that diffraction starts setting in at around f/11. Personally, though, I never notice it in my own photos.

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

km

Lens testing is a very worthwhile, but, time consuming exercise I have found over the years. I reckon it takes me about a year to get used to a camera/lens combination. This may seem a slightly absurd practice to a lot of you, but, this is what I have found to work well for me:

 

Fuji X Pro 1 with 60mm lens @ 5.6 and 8

Fuji X100 with 23mm lens (fixed) @ 5.6 and 8, occasionally with wide converter @ 5.6

Sony NEX 5N with 30mm Sigma lens @ 2.8, 5.6 and 8

Sony NEX 6 with Zeiss 24mm @ 5.6 and 8

 

The camera lens combinations never change, and no, I don't carry all of them at the same time.

 

Strange?

Yes I am.

 

Too lazy to change lenses?

Yes I am.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lens testing is a very worthwhile, but, time consuming exercise I have found over the years. I reckon it takes me about a year to get used to a camera/lens combination. This may seem a slightly absurd practice to a lot of you, but, this is what I have found to work well for me:

However, every lens does have a "sweet spot." Most lenses are not as sharp wide open as they are closed down a couple of f-stops. Lens tests usually indicate that diffraction starts setting in at around f/11. Personally, though, I never notice it in my own photos.

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

km

 

Fuji X Pro 1 with 60mm lens @ 5.6 and 8

Fuji X100 with 23mm lens (fixed) @ 5.6 and 8, occasionally with wide converter @ 5.6

Sony NEX 5N with 30mm Sigma lens @ 2.8, 5.6 and 8

Sony NEX 6 with Zeiss 24mm @ 5.6 and 8

 

The camera lens combinations never change, and no, I don't carry all of them at the same time.

 

Strange?

Yes I am.

 

Too lazy to change lenses?

Yes I am.  :(

Thanks for the results. I'm too lazy to do lens tests. It sounds as if the Sigma 30mm is a good investment. I wish it had image stabilization, though. The Sony 16mm "pancake" is sharp in the centre at f/2.8, but you have to close down to f/5.6 to improve the corners/edges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, the Sigma 30mm is a very good investment, believe me, for the price its unbeatable!

So sharp you can shave with it!

 

IS, yeah well, you can't have everything, not for 130 quid anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

 

basic stuff

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/diffraction.htm

 

km

 

I was worried about diffraction when I got my D800 last year as the large sensor size causes diffraction to set in at wider apertures. Most of my images are landscapes and I have always shot at f11 for optimum depth of field and edge to edge sharpness, with film and D700 previously. I have done some serious practical testing of the lenses I use most (50 and 24 Nikkors) on the D800 and I can detect absolutely no diffraction effects at f11. Edge fall off at f8 is very evident on the 24 compared to f11 and overall sharpness is worse at f16. So I think that the diffraction problem is exaggerated, at least for my practical purposes (and I'm very fussy with image quality - not sure how Russell would diagnose this). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tested and used Canon L zooms and Canon L primes and Zeiss primes on full frame. As a rule of thumb they are all sharpest in the centre at 5.6 but showing curvature of field in the corners resulting in less than optimum corners. At F11 they are very slightly softer in the centre but with sharper corners. Therefore the F11 is best for overall sharpness. Stop down even 1/3 stop past F11 and sharpness falls off a cliff due to diffraction.

 

So F11 for overall scenics. F5.6 for centered objects where the corners are better off soft. If you need F22 depth of field shoot 3 shots at F11, at different focus points, and stack them in Photoshop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

However, every lens does have a "sweet spot." Most lenses are not as sharp wide open as they are closed down a couple of f-stops. Lens tests usually indicate that diffraction starts setting in at around f/11. Personally, though, I never notice it in my own photos.

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

km

Lens testing is a very worthwhile, but, time consuming exercise I have found over the years. I reckon it takes me about a year to get used to a camera/lens combination. This may seem a slightly absurd practice to a lot of you, but, this is what I have found to work well for me:

 

Fuji X Pro 1 with 60mm lens @ 5.6 and 8

Fuji X100 with 23mm lens (fixed) @ 5.6 and 8, occasionally with wide converter @ 5.6

Sony NEX 5N with 30mm Sigma lens @ 2.8, 5.6 and 8

Sony NEX 6 with Zeiss 24mm @ 5.6 and 8

 

The camera lens combinations never change, and no, I don't carry all of them at the same time.

 

Strange?

Yes I am.

 

Too lazy to change lenses?

Yes I am.  :(

 

Dr. Strange, I may be a bit strange myself. That is my tests on Sony NEX-6 and NEX-7 with your 24 and Sigma 30 came out with the same results. Ah, but how was your Sony 16 test? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>...(and I'm very fussy with image quality - not sure how Russell would diagnose this). 

 

You have the same as me but yours is a forme fruste.

 

There's a lot of it about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

<snip>...(and I'm very fussy with image quality - not sure how Russell would diagnose this). 

 

You have the same as me but yours is a forme fruste.

 

There's a lot of it about.

 

I have to disagree with the diagnosis doc. If anything I am the complete opposite. Anally retentive me - absolutely not -  I won't go into the reasons why not - you wouldn't want to know. Aspergers - me - absolutely not - I'm ultra-sensitive to other people's feelings for one thing. I would make a terrible therapist - I would feel everything I was hearing.

 

Obsessive - now that I will admit to - probably the reason I end up with vast numbers of images, just making sure I got the shot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

<snip>...(and I'm very fussy with image quality - not sure how Russell would diagnose this). 

 

You have the same as me but yours is a forme fruste.

 

There's a lot of it about.

 

I have to disagree with the diagnosis doc. If anything I am the complete opposite. Anally retentive me - absolutely not -  I won't go into the reasons why not - you wouldn't want to know. Aspergers - me - absolutely not - I'm ultra-sensitive to other people's feelings for one thing. I would make a terrible therapist - I would feel everything I was hearing.

 

Obsessive - now that I will admit to - probably the reason I end up with vast numbers of images, just making sure I got the shot. 

 

But obsessive traits are part of both anal retentiveness and the Aspie spectrum. So give it time. Yours is not a typical presentation.  ;)

Edited by Russell Watkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, have we gone off topic on this one!!!

:)

 

Slightly, maybe. That's the interwebs for you. But I think discussing the psychology of how we approach QC and what goes through our minds when we're PP-ing is relevant. And interesting. And quite possibly helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boy, have we gone off topic on this one!!!

:)

 

Slightly, maybe. That's the interwebs for you. But I think discussing the psychology of how we approach QC and what goes through our minds when we're PP-ing is relevant. And interesting. And quite possibly helpful.

 

For sure. Perhaps how one approaches QC could form the basis of a new archetypal classification. On the one hand there is the Fatalist: I know this blurred image with 1 micron depth of field focused on a fly's eye has almost no chance of passing QC but I really want to add it to my Alamy collection and I will continue to submit it until it kills me. On the other there is the Mouse: is that a tiny wind blur in that tree 100 metres away even though it was perfectly still when I took the shot (or so I thought)? Actually I belong very much to the latter category - after a few early QC failures when I first started, I was so careful with what I submitted that I have a large number of images that would almost certainly have passed QC had I tried - very much as Russell described. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon, bunny rabbit cross (= cross bunny-rabbit?!) :D

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon, bunny rabbit cross (= cross bunny-rabbit?!) :D

Brings Monty Python and the Holy Grail to mind. How about Coneco Loco given your username? Has a better ring to it.

Edited by MDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dragon, bunny rabbit cross (= cross bunny-rabbit?!) :D

Brings Monty Python and the Holy Grail to mind. How about Coneco Loco given your username? Has a better ring to it.

 

Conejo (Conejito) loco?  Not bad at all.  I might have to think about that!  Anyhow, ever so slightly OT...I'll hop off now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Lens testing is a very worthwhile, but, time consuming exercise I have found over the years. I reckon it takes me about a year to get used to a camera/lens combination. This may seem a slightly absurd practice to a lot of you, but, this is what I have found to work well for me:

However, every lens does have a "sweet spot." Most lenses are not as sharp wide open as they are closed down a couple of f-stops. Lens tests usually indicate that diffraction starts setting in at around f/11. Personally, though, I never notice it in my own photos.

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

km

 

Fuji X Pro 1 with 60mm lens @ 5.6 and 8

Fuji X100 with 23mm lens (fixed) @ 5.6 and 8, occasionally with wide converter @ 5.6

Sony NEX 5N with 30mm Sigma lens @ 2.8, 5.6 and 8

Sony NEX 6 with Zeiss 24mm @ 5.6 and 8

 

The camera lens combinations never change, and no, I don't carry all of them at the same time.

 

Strange?

Yes I am.

 

Too lazy to change lenses?

Yes I am.  :(

Dr. Strange, I may be a bit strange myself. That is my tests on Sony NEX-6 and NEX-7 with your 24 and Sigma 30 came out with the same results. Ah, but how was your Sony 16 test? 

Ed, Personally, I wouldn't touch the Sony 16 with a barge pole!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deleted, hate this editor.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed, Personally, I wouldn't touch the Sony 16 with a barge pole!

 

 

Lens testing is a very worthwhile, but, time consuming exercise I have found over the years. I reckon it takes me about a year to get used to a camera/lens combination. This may seem a slightly absurd practice to a lot of you, but, this is what I have found to work well for me:

However, every lens does have a "sweet spot." Most lenses are not as sharp wide open as they are closed down a couple of f-stops. Lens tests usually indicate that diffraction starts setting in at around f/11. Personally, though, I never notice it in my own photos.

working digital is not like working film

stopping down the lens more does not increase sharpness

beyond a certain point you run into diffraction issues

km

 

Fuji X Pro 1 with 60mm lens @ 5.6 and 8

Fuji X100 with 23mm lens (fixed) @ 5.6 and 8, occasionally with wide converter @ 5.6

Sony NEX 5N with 30mm Sigma lens @ 2.8, 5.6 and 8

Sony NEX 6 with Zeiss 24mm @ 5.6 and 8

 

The camera lens combinations never change, and no, I don't carry all of them at the same time.

 

Strange?

Yes I am.

 

Too lazy to change lenses?

Yes I am.  :(

Dr. Strange, I may be a bit strange myself. That is my tests on Sony NEX-6 and NEX-7 with your 24 and Sigma 30 came out with the same results. Ah, but how was your Sony 16 test? 

I think that the Sony 16mm gets a bum rap. All my images taken with it have passed QC. It may not be one for serious landscape photographers, but it's a great little lens for general work if you are careful with it.  Even the corners aren't bad for a wide angle lens if you step down a couple of f-stops (see CT6BR4).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with your assessment of the Sony 16, John. But it would really be nice to have a very-wide that's sharper at the edges.

 

As you may remember, I bought the Zeiss 12 Touit for NEX a while back, but it turned out that this lens was constantly hunting. I returned it. So I'm back to using the 16 . . . and back to being careful with it. 

 

Hey, Nick . . . what was the subject of this thread? Winter skies in Scotland? Oh no, that was the other thread. I'm going to try to move things over to what beers are best in Mexico. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with your assessment of the Sony 16, John. But it would really be nice to have a very-wide that's sharper at the edges.

 

As you may remember, I bought the Zeiss 12 Touit for NEX a while back, but it turned out that this lens was constantly hunting. I returned it. So I'm back to using the 16 . . . and back to being careful with it. 

 

Hey, Nick . . . what was the subject of this thread? Winter skies in Scotland? Oh no, that was the other thread. I'm going to try to move things over to what beers are best in Mexico. 

There are so many good cervezas Mexicanas to choose from. I'm a big fan of Negra Modelo and Dos Equis Amber. Corona, by far the most popular one north of the Rio Bravo, looks and tastes like you-know-what IMO. I wouldn't touch it with a very long pole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, Nick . . . what was the subject of this thread? Winter skies in Scotland? Oh no, that was the other thread. I'm going to try to move things over to what beers are best in Mexico. 

 

Hmm, I'll go for Modelo, though not too experienced in Mexican beers, but I did get rather fond of Beerlao in Laos. :)

 

Second thoughts, wait...you weren't serious...about beer?!  Had a nice one in Wales in a great pub not too long back (photo excuse coming on..Mirco, where are you, I know you've got more! :) ):

 

DH6CB0.jpg

 

P.S. Is this the longest ever thread on this forum, about everything?  Maybe it's just Chinese whispers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.