Diffraction Limit

Started Aug 28, 2013 | Discussions thread
Steen Bay Veteran Member • Posts: 6,974
Re: The plain truth can indeed be phrased in very misleading ways...

Anders W wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

Anders W wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

So while the "fundamental" statement is correct the reality is that smaller sensors suffer from diffraction at larger apertures than large sensors because we change the magnification of the image captured by the surface of the sensor.

A man after my own heart...common sense at it's best!

So you are starting to see at least parts of the light after all?

I've always had the light...

Don't know whether you had it but you sure didn't see it.

it's the BS one has to filter out...


GB wrote:

In short, it is entirely possible for the FZ200 to be sharper at f/4 than it is at f/2.8, even though at f/2.8 it is already well within the realm of strong diffraction softening, and the lesser lens aberrations at f/4 may outweigh the increased diffraction softening.

Regardless, the effects of diffraction softening at f/2.8 on an FZ200 are identical to the effects of diffraction softening at f/8 on mFT and f/16 on FF, it's just that diffraction softening is one of many forms of blur.

As long as you consider this part of the light, we are in full agreement here too.

Well, it could be discussed whether the 12mp FZ200 at f/2.8 is "well within the realm of strong diffraction softening". Your test images in the other thread showed that f/8 on the 16mp E-M5 (DoF/diffraction equivalent to f/2.8 on FZ200) was perfectly fine (you didn't show images shot at larger apertures, but said that you didn't see any noticeable difference in sharpness at f/8).

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