Olympus 17/1.8 review

Started Nov 17, 2012 | Discussions thread
noirdesir Forum Pro • Posts: 13,254
Re: Macrocontrast vs. Microcontrast

Ming Thein wrote:

The problem is the whole MTF thing is misleading - firstly, it's often theoretical, not measured (i.e. doesn't take into account sample variation, mfg tolerances etc) and secondly, it doesn't say anything about field curvature. You could have a wickedly sharp/ highly-resolving lens that has a touch of field curvature, and if measured wide open, would show terrible dropoff into the corners because DOF would be insufficient to cover the curvature. The Zeiss 2/28 Distagon is one such lens - yet I've never found it wanting in resolution, even on the D800E.

For a theoretical discussion it does not matter whether measurements exist or not, in effect it might be even better if no measurements exist because one can be unbiased in developing a theory and if after one has postulated a theory somebody else confirms your theory with measurements, this is usually a better confirmation of the theory than the other way around.

But there are actual measured full MTF curves (from DxOmark) though it is unclear whether or how they account for field curvature, thus maybe it is safest to restrict ones evaluation of them to the central point.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow