Diffraction Limit

Started Aug 28, 2013 | Discussions thread
Detail Man
Detail Man Forum Pro • Posts: 16,801
Re: Diffraction Effects in a Real Lens-Camera System

LTZ470 wrote:

Detail Man wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

Know a lot or think they "know" a lot? Love it when the school boys come out to play!

The usefulness of the above "calculator" has been debunked a multitude of times on DPReview Forums. The most recent example of that was on this particular recent Open Talk thread here:


... on which I posted this (if you really want to get into the numbers that actually matter):


It is a mistake to assume that some given website (including "Cambridge In Color" and "Luminous Landscape" must sure define shining "absolute truth". In fact, there are certain posters on these (as well as the LL) forums who actually understand these subjects well, and know a lot more more about these subjects than the offerings of many, many web-sites and web-blogs.

Complicated subjects cannot be easily simplified - and it is thus a mistake to wrongly assume so.

It is possible to better understand these subjects - but it is necessary to make the (non-trivial) effort of reading and thinking about and trying to understand what these folks are actually talking about.

I have provided you with a huge amount of specific and accurate information in the last few days, and linked you to even more reliable information. What Anders and Joe are saying to you is not untrue (though I do indeed think that there are just a few things in Joe's method of explanation that are well served by some further surrounding facts being mentioned).

All in all, there is much to learn before one can even imagine to begin to "teach" others about complicated subjects. Humbling it can be. It has been for me. It likely is for any intelligent participant.

On DP Review?...really DM?...are you also inebriated by the exuberance of your own verbosity?

The more such verbosities emerges from intelligent beings, the more interesting things may become. I have spent quite a bit of effort in sincerity attempting to provide you with relevant and important information about this (and other) subject(s). I genuinely did it for you, my friend.

I think that if you (may) consider me as a "showboat" instead, I will refrain from further efforts.

Let's look at the other side of the equation:

It is a mistake to assume that some given website, including DPReview can define shining "absolute truth".

What I said is that certain posters (not web-sites) have comprehensive and valuable understandings of certain subjects. In this, (a few of those people are) bobn2, Great Bustard, and Anders W. After many hours of studying and pondering some of these things over the last few months time, (even) I might be worth attempting to read and to listen to (?).

In fact, there are certain posters on DPReview are inebriated by the exuberance of their own verbosity as well...

There may be. Aren't we all at some times and places in our lives ?


I learn by "concrete proof in the pudding"...there is none for the FZ200 being diffraction limited at f/2.8...

Nobody declared that as "FZ200 truth". I told yout that DIWA Labs' testing of the DMC-FZ28 using DxOMark's testing equipment showed that to be true in the case of the FZ28's (18x zoom) lens.


I have never once steered you wrong, my firend, and I have spent a fair number of hours explaining my thoughts on many technical matters (in my best understanding) to you over the years. If those thoughts are too long and wordy for you to read, that's OK. I understand that.

However, if you want "facts" to be "proved" to you, it will likely require that you invest the effort to read the expressed thoughts of others that you may not instantly understand. Such is life. I usually don't criticize concepts and ideas that I do not feel that I understand the contents of. After all, how would I even "know" that something is "wrong" when I don't clearly understand the subjects being discussed ? The same principle applies regarding what may be "right". It is simply not possible to enagage in "critical thought prcodesses" otherwise.

The "proof of the pudding is in the eating". Eating implies digesting and metabolizing the materials consumed - and thus must transcend mere momentary mastications and spontaneous regurgitations.

Learning, the destroyer of arrogance, begets arrogance in fools; even as light, that illuminates the eye, makes owls blind.
- Panchatantra

DM ...

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