|
|
enlargement from prime vs. telephoto
This is highly subjective but suppose I want to enlarge a portion of a
photo taken with a premium-quality 50mm lens to equal that of an image area taken with a premium-quality 80mm lens. Approximately 50 percent enlargement. Is the image with the 50 just 5/8s as clean as the same image taken with the 80? What I'm getting at is this: how much do I lose in final print quality by enlarging from a 50 as opposed to using an 80? I'm sure brands make a difference and not all premium lenses at given focal lengths are equal to other. But is there a rough rule of thumb beyond the obvious fraction? |
|
|
|
Chris Loffredo wrote:
wrote: This is highly subjective but suppose I want to enlarge a portion of a photo taken with a premium-quality 50mm lens to equal that of an image area taken with a premium-quality 80mm lens. Approximately 50 percent enlargement. Is the image with the 50 just 5/8s as clean as the same image taken with the 80? What I'm getting at is this: how much do I lose in final print quality by enlarging from a 50 as opposed to using an 80? I'm sure brands make a difference and not all premium lenses at given focal lengths are equal to other. But is there a rough rule of thumb beyond the obvious fraction? You'll lose more than 50% quality: At the film/sensor level, grain/pixels will be 50% bigger, resolution 50% less, partially SUMMED to a 50% reduction in lens resolution... There are a lot of truly great short teles out there (even used): It would be a pity to lose what they can offer! Chris Maybe, but remember he will, I hope, be using the center area of the image. The center area of the image is usually the sharpest, least distored part of the image a lens can make. So in practice, that does reduce the actural real life loss. There are so many possible issues, I suggset the user, just give it a try and see if he likes it. All the formulas and theories are nothing compaired to the real thing. :-) -- Joseph E. Meehan 26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math |
Alan Browne wrote:
wrote: The middle section of the 80mm shot will be the sharpest. If your enlargement takes from the edges/corners then those areas will be a bit softer. ooops ...meant 50mm obviously. Cheers, Alan -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
Alan Browne wrote:
wrote: The middle section of the 80mm shot will be the sharpest. If your enlargement takes from the edges/corners then those areas will be a bit softer. ooops ...meant 50mm obviously. Cheers, Alan -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
writes:
This is highly subjective but suppose I want to enlarge a portion of a photo taken with a premium-quality 50mm lens to equal that of an image area taken with a premium-quality 80mm lens. I think there are other variables. While they all can be eliminated, on a practical level I think nobody actually would. For a few examples, I think most people would handhold the camera with both a 50 and an 80. (I had an old Nikon rangefinder with an 8.5cm lens on it -- I never used a tripod.) I also think most people would use full automatic exposure, and that the camera would use different settings for the two lenses. If I were using the two lenses on my FM2 and were unaware I were making a test shot, there's no guarantee I'd use the same aperture and shutter speed. Given the different lenses, I suspect I'd take too many things into account -- blurring the background, using a faster shutter on the 80 to take into account the longer lens -- to be able to judge whether the differences were the lens or me. I've read the answer to this, but I can't remember it: If I enlarge a segment of an image taken with a 50mm lens to match the unenlarged image from an 80mm, is the depth of field affected? I get confused about perspective and whatever else changes. If DOF isn't changed, I think determining whether the image quality is the same becomes more judgmental. -- Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip@ http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily. |
writes:
This is highly subjective but suppose I want to enlarge a portion of a photo taken with a premium-quality 50mm lens to equal that of an image area taken with a premium-quality 80mm lens. I think there are other variables. While they all can be eliminated, on a practical level I think nobody actually would. For a few examples, I think most people would handhold the camera with both a 50 and an 80. (I had an old Nikon rangefinder with an 8.5cm lens on it -- I never used a tripod.) I also think most people would use full automatic exposure, and that the camera would use different settings for the two lenses. If I were using the two lenses on my FM2 and were unaware I were making a test shot, there's no guarantee I'd use the same aperture and shutter speed. Given the different lenses, I suspect I'd take too many things into account -- blurring the background, using a faster shutter on the 80 to take into account the longer lens -- to be able to judge whether the differences were the lens or me. I've read the answer to this, but I can't remember it: If I enlarge a segment of an image taken with a 50mm lens to match the unenlarged image from an 80mm, is the depth of field affected? I get confused about perspective and whatever else changes. If DOF isn't changed, I think determining whether the image quality is the same becomes more judgmental. -- Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip@ http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com