How sharp is the FP-L?

Amadeus21 wrote:

Sorry, but in my opinion this is a somewhat absurd question. When is a picture "sharp"?, normally given, that you have a good oder very good (and therefore expensive) lens, given, you have set up the focus and aperture to the most accurate setup, given, that you put the camera on a tripoid or to at least 1/500 sec in order to avoid camera shake. Then may have all "mathematical" conditions to take a "sharp" photo. But appeares such a picture as "sharp", if you blow up the resoluting file up to 1.20 meter x 1.20 meter on the wall and then looking at it out of the distance of 15 centimeter? What, if looking through a microscope?

I have never asked for ulimatively sharp pictures, but expressive pictures. No one is impressed by sharp pictures in an exhibition - exept of pixel peepers, but they visit exhibition not for expressive pictures, but for pixel peeping. An other aspect is to have the focus in a picture on the wrong detail, e.g. to have a person portait, but the focus is on the tip of the nose, but not the eyes.

I had a lot of nice exhibitions with pictures up to over 2 meters width with my SD1M. Those picts you use to look at out of distances of several meters on a large, free wall.

What are "sharp" pictures?

Best wishes,

Johannes

Not an absurd question. According to you gear list, you don't have an FP-L, so are you truly in a position to answer my post? My question deals more with whether the FPL have micro lenses over the sensor, or some other filter that softens the image.

I'm a senior member too here, and of course know of viewing distances, software sharpening, lens qualities, handheld vs. tripod shooting.

And yes, original sharpness is important if you're going to enlarge to very large sizes. Your personal opinion about this may differ, but I think it's important. Hope you can respect that.