How do you determine a "sharp" 70-200 lens?

[PavelOlavich]

Here's my sharpy from the 70-200L: Canon 1D Mark II, from RAW, ISO 400, F8 @ 200mm focal length.

[jfrancho]

Yeah, I goofed up that post...woops.

bit difficoult, getting F3.2 out of a F4 lens

I realize total DOF won't really apply, but sharpness at the focus point (the eyes) can still be compared. That's why I said "similar."

[brian.austin]

Originally Posted by PavelOlavich

First off, NEVER save or archive a mastered image that has had USM applied. THis is a big no-no...otherwise your mastered image is stuck with particular USM parameters. Only apply USM just before you publish to the web or print to paper, and then DON'T save the image off...leave it archived with NO sharpening. This is because the amount of USM applied to an image is a function of where you will publish (web or paper) and how big the image will be presented at. To do otherwise will lock you into a particular USM application and you don't want that to happen....one cannot undo USM once it is applied, and the file saved.

Secondly, as an image size goes up, so should radius 0.1 increments at a time. As an image is resized down, radius goes down 0.1 increments at a time. This is very general because each image has it's own paramter values that must be dialed in for that particular image. The subject matter comes into play to and helps determine what the three USM parameters should be.

I cannot speak to LightRoom, as I've never used it....my comments are more CS2 specific.

Lightroom is similar to Aperture: it doesn't adjust the original image and uses versions. Save leaves the original file intact.

[brian.austin]

All of examples beg a question: how much of a "sharp" example is relevant to the lens and how much to other elements of the image?

Consider sensor size/MP, ISO, shutter speed, aperture (a gimme), tripod/no tripod, IS/no IS, image contrast, etc.. Can you compare a 30D with a 5D or 1D/1Ds when both are sized for web viewing?

[Max@Home]

Here's my sharpy from the 70-200L: Canon 1D Mark II, from RAW, ISO 400, F8 @ 200mm focal length

...great expression, well caught!

...not a bad sports-shot for a 5D wedding hack shooting with the lowly 1DMkII .

...what was the shutterspeed again ?



EOS20D+70-200F2.8L IS, 1/1250s F8.0, ISO400 at 153.0mm, handheld



EOS20D+70-200F2.8L IS + 1.4x II, 1/1000s, F5,6, ISO400 at 130mm, handheld



Max@Home

[jfrancho]

I don't think you can evaluate lens sharpness using a resized image. I have quite a few that look great at 800 px. but are quite soft at 100%. Different bicubic algorithms and high pass sharpening can go a long way to rescuing a soft image. Nothing beats getting right the first time, though.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by brian.austin

Can you compare a 30D with a 5D or 1D/1Ds when both are sized for web viewing?

...webviewing makes all comparisons irrelevant as even a cellphone shot can look great ... unless it's a 100% crop ... I am all for environment & nature, but spare me... not that ...and how do you propose we resize them titanium bodies: sledgehammer or laserbeam ??



Max@Home

[moizes]

Sorry for misunderstanding; I really meant no harm, take my apology, please! There are no topic in Nikon area - guys are bussing about this nonexisted D3, I simply don't know who really needs it without lenses on wide end - not even 1 new lens! Sorry-sorry - it's Canon department! Beautiful images, guys, BTW! Dimitri.

[PavelOlavich]

Originally Posted by brian.austin

All of examples beg a question: how much of a "sharp" example is relevant to the lens and how much to other elements of the image?

Consider sensor size/MP, ISO, shutter speed, aperture (a gimme), tripod/no tripod, IS/no IS, image contrast, etc.. Can you compare a 30D with a 5D or 1D/1Ds when both are sized for web viewing?

Originally Posted by jfrancho

I don't think you can evaluate lens sharpness using a resized image. I have quite a few that look great at 800 px. but are quite soft at 100%. Different bicubic algorithms and high pass sharpening can go a long way to rescuing a soft image. Nothing beats getting right the first time, though.

I agree with youse guys, images shown on the web are a poor way to ascertain sharpness between lenses, bodies, etc...on the other hand if the lens is really bad or the user is not skilled then the deficientcy is blatent.

Even a print between a Rebel XT and a 1DS Mark II at 8 x 10 or smaller will often not show a difference in quality most of the time.

Posting images here is more academic then useful...besides, it's fun to share.

[PavelOlavich]

Originally Posted by moizes

Sorry for misunderstanding; I really meant no harm, take my apology, please! There are no topic in Nikon area - guys are bussing about this nonexisted D3, I simply don't know who really needs it without lenses on wide end - not even 1 new lens! Sorry-sorry - it's Canon department! Beautiful images, guys, BTW! Dimitri.

No need to apologize...sorry my words came too sharp..I used a laughing face but I guess my light hearted words were lost to you or others...hope you can stick around here...we need more discourse here...it gets to quiet here sometimes.