Do you think Olympus 75mm F1.8 is sharp wide open?

Well, at least it allows to get close. But, is it sharp enough, what do you think?

75/1.8

75/1.8

TheEye wrote:

On which particular hair did you focus?

In the first shot I focused on the eyelash.

It's depth of field is very narrow wide open which may lead you to your conclusion.  That conclusion is, of course, incorrect.

N

Erik00 wrote:

If it isn´t sharp enough for you, you might have a problem. Hope you are satisfied.

Let's forget about my problems for a moment. And, Nikko aus London, I wonder how you figured out what conclusions I made. And that my conclusions are already incorrect. This doesn't help my self-assertion as a photographer in any way.

I may have a problem being a little indecisive. Sometimes I take photos that I like but my wife hates them. My friends love some of my photos, but they won't tell a thing about another ones.
But this is not what this thread is about.
So, I asked a question to wider audience - if the photos look sharp. That's a simple question, isn't it?

I think in the first picture it's easier to see sharpness in the eyebrow, because the hairs are better separated than in the eyelashes. It's awfully sharp, but I think I would prefer the whole face to be in focus, especially when the background is far enough to maintain isolation even at smaller apertures.

Vlad

micksh6 wrote:

Well, at least it allows to get close. But, is it sharp enough, what do you think?

75/1.8

75/1.8

TheEye wrote:

I think the 75 mm would be best for 3/4 or full body portraits, while the 45mm would be better suited for headshots.

A longer lens will include less surroundings for the same framing of the main subject, so if one wants or needs to exclude objects on the sides of the frame, then the 75 will give an advantage. But for head shots it definitely needs to be stopped down to have more of the face in focus.

Vlad

Camancha wrote:

Yes, it's very sharp.

Kind regards
.lars

I agree!!

micksh6 wrote:

Erik00 wrote:

If it isn´t sharp enough for you, you might have a problem. Hope you are satisfied.

Let's forget about my problems for a moment. And, Nikko aus London, I wonder how you figured out what conclusions I made. And that my conclusions are already incorrect. This doesn't help my self-assertion as a photographer in any way.

I may have a problem being a little indecisive. Sometimes I take photos that I like but my wife hates them. My friends love some of my photos, but they won't tell a thing about another ones.
But this is not what this thread is about.
So, I asked a question to wider audience - if the photos look sharp. That's a simple question, isn't it?

How did I figure out your conclusions, Mick?  Perhaps it's to do with how you phrased your questions: "Is it sharp wide open?" in the post title and "Is it sharp enough?" in the body of your post.  I'm no Einstein but I drew the same conclusion as other respondents which is that you have some concerns about the relative sharpness of this lens.  That's a fair assumption, no?

That being the case, and because of the experience I have in owning one, I thought I would try to assuage your angst by pointing out that, wide open, this lens has a very narrow depth of field measured in a few cm.  When shooting it wide open, one might incorrectly conclude that the lens is not sharp because areas adjacent to the critically-sharp focus point appear less sharp as a consequence of narrow DOF.

Does that clear up the matter of: (a) how I came to make the assumptions I did; and (b) how I thought I would try to help your understanding?  My style may be sparse at times but never malicious.

Nikko

Nikko aus London wrote:

micksh6 wrote:

Erik00 wrote:

If it isn´t sharp enough for you, you might have a problem. Hope you are satisfied.

Let's forget about my problems for a moment. And, Nikko aus London, I wonder how you figured out what conclusions I made. And that my conclusions are already incorrect. This doesn't help my self-assertion as a photographer in any way.

I may have a problem being a little indecisive. Sometimes I take photos that I like but my wife hates them. My friends love some of my photos, but they won't tell a thing about another ones.
But this is not what this thread is about.
So, I asked a question to wider audience - if the photos look sharp. That's a simple question, isn't it?

How did I figure out your conclusions, Mick?  Perhaps it's to do with how you phrased your questions: "Is it sharp wide open?" in the post title and "Is it sharp enough?" in the body of your post.  I'm no Einstein but I drew the same conclusion as other respondents which is that you have some concerns about the relative sharpness of this lens.  That's a fair assumption, no?

Nope:) I just asked a question - what do people think.

That being the case, and because of the experience I have in owning one, I thought I would try to assuage your angst by pointing out that, wide open, this lens has a very narrow depth of field measured in a few cm.  When shooting it wide open, one might incorrectly conclude that the lens is not sharp because areas adjacent to the critically-sharp focus point appear less sharp as a consequence of narrow DOF.

Does that clear up the matter of: (a) how I came to make the assumptions I did; and (b) how I thought I would try to help your understanding?

Yes to both (a) and (b). Thank you. Now I understand.

Sorry for confusion. Everybody assumed that these are full shots, right?
TheEye: "Show us a 100% crop of the area that contains the element (eyelash, you said) on that you focused"
These are 1.3 and 1.6 megapixel crops.

I presented this thread in such way to illustrate how deceiving it is to judge sharpness by 1 megapixel images. And some are posting 0.5-1.3 megapixel pictures to brag about sharpness of their gear (Panasonic FZ200 owners in particular).

And, of course, I wanted to emphasize sharpness of Olympus 75mm lens. I figured if 10% crop would appear sharp then disclosing that lens renders 10 times more detail would make a stronger point.

BTW, how could you (all) not notice that these were crops?
See the second shot in OP. If it were full frame even Oly 45mm at F1.8 would show one eye sharper than another. But both eyes are almost equally sharp. This shows too wide DOF (even for m4/3).

I got you, didn't I?

Don't put me in a troll list just yet:) I am still a contributing member according to new DPR rating and I will continue to contribute. Until I become a senior, at least.
Below are the full shots. And please see my next thread with Oly 75mm samples:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50018934

Olympus 75mm F1.8 at Renaissance Faire

Olympus 75mm F1.8 at Renaissance Faire

Yohan Pamudji wrote:

The answer seems so obviously "yes" that I feel like I'm walking into a trap

Seems like you knew it:)

"BTW, how could you (all) not notice that these were crops?"

Guess we're all blithering idiots.  At least that's how I feel.  Mission accomplished, bravo.

People here would argue over if the sun is hot.....

RonFrank wrote:

People here would argue over if the sun is hot.....