On the bright side, can always take your time to make your coffee and slowly enjoy while its stitching hahahaha. 9-18 in the right situation, I find can be pretty sharp, one of the photos I took of my sch 2 years back was pretty sharp
Leaving the SLR at home
- Thread starter snapperBB
- Start date
On the bright side, can always take your time to make your coffee and slowly enjoy while its stitching hahahaha. 9-18 in the right situation, I find can be pretty sharp, one of the photos I took of my sch 2 years back was pretty sharp
microcosm
Senior Member
You are right, I need a little more patience... Sharpness can be overrated. Details is the critical thing. Don't you think?
albertri
Senior Member
Sorry to jump in the conversation
resolution is actually is a perceptual factor to sharpness
from what I read sharpness has to factors to consider resolution and acutance. Here's a good definition from website Ive stumble upon (disclaimer: these words are not mine I've copy this from the website )Resolution is the most familiar of the two perceptual factors contributing to sharpness. We've already looked at how much resolution is needed. You may start at 100 lp/mm (though typically not more than 50 lp/mm) but along the way if you end up with 10 lp/mm on a print you'll have a very crisp image indeed, and even 5lp/mm on a print is considered critically sharp by many observers. (To be scientifically accurate you actually should have somewhat more resolution than this (maybe 30 lp/mm) on a low contrast image because of acutance effects).
Acutance is the less understood characteristic of sharpness. Acutance isn't about resolving detail, it's about the transition between edges. In other words when an edge changes from one brightness level to another. This is what Sharpening in digital parlance is all about. Scanning and digital capture softens acutance and so we apply a (ill-named) process called an Unsharp Mask to increase edge sharpness back to what it should be. Remember, this has nothing to do with resolution, the other aspect of sharpness. Unfortunately some anti-digital Luddites still confuse the two.
Last edited:
thanks. Always wanted to know how digital imagery sharpness came about.
so, getting a nice contrasty image can offset a poor resolutioned image?
so, getting a nice contrasty image can offset a poor resolutioned image?
Sorry to jump in the conversation
resolution is actually is a perceptual factor to sharpness
Resolution is the most familiar of the two perceptual factors contributing to sharpness. We've already looked at how much resolution is needed. You may start at 100 lp/mm (though typically not more than 50 lp/mm) but along the way if you end up with 10 lp/mm on a print you'll have a very crisp image indeed, and even 5lp/mm on a print is considered critically sharp by many observers. (To be scientifically accurate you actually should have somewhat more resolution than this (maybe 30 lp/mm) on a low contrast image because of acutance effects).
Acutance is the less understood characteristic of sharpness. Acutance isn't about resolving detail, it's about the transition between edges. In other words when an edge changes from one brightness level to another. This is what Sharpening in digital parlance is all about. Scanning and digital capture softens acutance and so we apply a (ill-named) process called an Unsharp Mask to increase edge sharpness back to what it should be. Remember, this has nothing to do with resolution, the other aspect of sharpness. Unfortunately some anti-digital Luddites still confuse the two.
albertri
Senior Member
to me it's all about balancing all factors. you have a high res photo but poor contrast is a waste
and as mentioned by the website it's perceptual factors hehe ;-) lets not dig too deep into these things we take photos it's not always all about sharpness and resolutions sometimes it's all about composition, message the photos it brings. I remember a photos contest where the winner was using a mobile phone camera and IQ was not that great coz the photo speaks to the the person look at it
microcosm
Senior Member
Yup. But the end result (output) plays a part as well. Other than sharpness (however it is determined), how shadow details are rendered, etc. Many elements play a part technically to produce the right results. And lastly latitude of the digital format. It goes insanely complicated if one thinks technical with photography.
Have an upcoming trip to hong kong tomorrow and the d800 will stay at home mainly because I have trip where dslr isn't as convenient to be left alone like ocean park and also Shenzhen when I'm out shopping for bargains and swinging a dslr on my neck/shoulder does not work that well...
Convenience and weight issues from my past experience going on holidays / trips can be minimize by carrying less (a uwa zoom and 50 and 100mm prime for example) in comparison to a 70-200 and also investing in a good bag to help spread the weight. A well packed dslr gear can be as easily travel-able as any micro 4/3 setup...
What I do notice a lot of us do not do is to travel w extra battery chargers... It's one basic electronic item if fail, could put all our shooting to a stall... It's ok of you're in gear land like Sg, hk, jpn but what if you're in Vietnam or Bali?
For my coming trip I will be traveling real nice and light - Omd + 12/2 w a pouch of batts and cards !! This will hopefully give me loads of extra mobility and change some perspective... I'll probably lose out on the Long end, but what will mean I have more time on the mid - wide end...
Convenience and weight issues from my past experience going on holidays / trips can be minimize by carrying less (a uwa zoom and 50 and 100mm prime for example) in comparison to a 70-200 and also investing in a good bag to help spread the weight. A well packed dslr gear can be as easily travel-able as any micro 4/3 setup...
What I do notice a lot of us do not do is to travel w extra battery chargers... It's one basic electronic item if fail, could put all our shooting to a stall... It's ok of you're in gear land like Sg, hk, jpn but what if you're in Vietnam or Bali?
For my coming trip I will be traveling real nice and light - Omd + 12/2 w a pouch of batts and cards !! This will hopefully give me loads of extra mobility and change some perspective... I'll probably lose out on the Long end, but what will mean I have more time on the mid - wide end...
Zoomster
Senior Member
Am really tempted to sell off my DSLR kit and go fully micro four thirds. I find the weight issue in DSLR the biggest problem for me. Recently I have been having a back problem (muscle strain) and carrying heavy equipment, bending down, etc can be a real hindrance.
A lighter weight for my camera will definitely help. I took my OM-D to Gardens by the Bay and was happy with the results using just the kit lens.
A lighter weight for my camera will definitely help. I took my OM-D to Gardens by the Bay and was happy with the results using just the kit lens.
Last edited:
neoro said:
I agree with most of your opinions but the above. A dslr is bigger n heftier than a m4/3 setup for sure. The flange distance already adds the bulk right off, not to mention the weight. The dslr body alone is already larger than my EM5 with 14 or 20 mm pancake. 2 dslr batteries already equal to 3 m4/3 batteries.
Until you yearn for that little bit more of "quality" or flexibility that the best compact camera can not deliver .....you know, capturing that smiling face at 2m away with a 100mm f2 35mmFOV lens with just the amount of bokeh that the lights will show up as nice balls .......and then changing the lens to 24mm/f2.8 35mmFOV for the candle light shots including everyone in the room ......
Sure. Don't get me wrong. I still love the EM5 for the 600mm EFL in a compact package with my Panny 100-300 and the DOF, bokeh and sharpness of the 45mm 1.8 for half-body portraits.
However for the shots you describe, its still possible. I find that by using my feet going closer down to 0.5m, I can still get a smiling face and those little balls of light. At F1.8 28mm FOV, it takes decent candlelight shots.
Let's not forget that no matter the EFL, the true FL determines the optical aberrations and distortions. So your 28mm EFL, which is 14mm true FL on m4/3, exhibits more perspective and barrel distortions than a real 28mm on 135 format. That's one of the prices to pay to keep things small.
Similar threads
