Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 02:23 PM 23-08-00 -0400, John Brownlow wrote: >on 23/8/00 1:57 pm, Dan Cardish at dcardish@microtec.net wrote: > > >> Sharpness mean nothing. Every beginning photo student knows this. > >Oh, right. I thought it was one of the key factors, along with flare >suppression, rendition, bokeh etc. Thanks for putting me right. As usual >your insight amazes. Erwin, you better go take Cardish's optics 101, you >hear? Anyhow, do go on. Have you actually read any of Erwins reports? > > >Some of us actually produce big prints from our 1.4 images. The 5% that's in >focus is very important, as is the bokeh. The argument that if most of the >image is o.o.f. then the sharpness of the remainder doesn't matter is a >really peculiar one, as is the bizarre idea that image quality isn't >important for photojournalists. > >How impressed do you think the picture desk will be with your coke bottle >pix? Apparently, if we are to believe you, they are impressed with your's, so anything's possible. >We're on different planets I think. Oh...I have no doubt about that... > >Your lens tests are pretty much the equivalent of driving four different >cars at 40 miles an hour down a straight smooth road without changing gear >or braking and then declaring there is nothing to choose between them apart >from the trim. So who asked you to look at them?