And again, the eternal question of lenses versus sensors

On 2015-05-24, RichA wrote:
So, IF any good lens today (stopped down) can exceed the resolution of
any current 35mm or smaller sensor (which seems to be the consensus
amongst people), then why do we see sharpness and resolution
differences between these lenses? For example, if a sensor provides a
resolution of 8 (arbitrary number since various sites use different
measures anyway) and lens 1 goes to 9 and lens 2 goes to 11, we
shouldn't see a difference in resolution between the two lenses
because both exceed the sensor, hitting a "sensor-ceiling" of
resolution of 8, as it were. But that isn't how the measurements come
out, as some lenses do resolve better on the same sensor.

There is a lot more to lens (and sensor or film) performance than mere
'resolution'.

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

On 5/25/2015 10:37 AM, Whiskers wrote:
On 2015-05-24, RichA wrote:
So, IF any good lens today (stopped down) can exceed the resolution of
any current 35mm or smaller sensor (which seems to be the consensus
amongst people), then why do we see sharpness and resolution
differences between these lenses? For example, if a sensor provides a
resolution of 8 (arbitrary number since various sites use different
measures anyway) and lens 1 goes to 9 and lens 2 goes to 11, we
shouldn't see a difference in resolution between the two lenses
because both exceed the sensor, hitting a "sensor-ceiling" of
resolution of 8, as it were. But that isn't how the measurements come
out, as some lenses do resolve better on the same sensor.

There is a lot more to lens (and sensor or film) performance than mere
'resolution'.

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...


Their spotting scopes can easily be converted for use with a camera.
They even make an adopter for iPhones.
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/nature/spotting-scopes-accessories-c210402


--
PeterN

In article ,
Whiskers wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

On Mon, 25 May 2015 13:23:33 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article ,
Whiskers wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't think there's nearly as much nonsense in the photo world. The
crap in audioland is never ending. I'm glad I didn't have more money
starting out, or I'd be the proud owner of about 20K in speaker
wire...

In article , Bill W
wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't think there's nearly as much nonsense in the photo world.

perhaps not as many individual items, but the level of ignorance is
just as high.

leica digital cameras are nothing special (they're rebranded panasonic)
and in many cases, worse than other cameras. one example was the m8 and
the missing infrared cut filter which resulted in odd colour shifts.

leica ended up sending hot mirror filters to customers, which didn't
really fix it properly.

The
crap in audioland is never ending. I'm glad I didn't have more money
starting out, or I'd be the proud owner of about 20K in speaker
wire...

be sure to use an 'audio grade' sd card:
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...ce-us160-low-n
oise-sr-64hxa-microsd-card/

On 2015-05-25, nospam wrote:
In article ,
Whiskers wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and
ask why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't know about that, but there are certainly some parameters that
can be measured and designed, for which Zeiss and Leica traditionally
took different decisions. Some photographers prefer one, some the
other, even to the extent of having lenses of one make converted to fit
onto cameras of the other make - hard-headed press photographers, not
technophiles with more money than sense. Nikon and Canon and other
makers also have their own particular differences and fans.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

On 2015-05-25, Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 25 May 2015 13:23:33 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article ,
Whiskers wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't think there's nearly as much nonsense in the photo world. The
crap in audioland is never ending. I'm glad I didn't have more money
starting out, or I'd be the proud owner of about 20K in speaker
wire...

The sort with arrows on the insulators to tell the electrons (or is it
the data bits?) which way to go?

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

On Mon, 25 May 2015 14:16:09 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Bill W
wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't think there's nearly as much nonsense in the photo world.

perhaps not as many individual items, but the level of ignorance is
just as high.

leica digital cameras are nothing special (they're rebranded panasonic)
and in many cases, worse than other cameras. one example was the m8 and
the missing infrared cut filter which resulted in odd colour shifts.

leica ended up sending hot mirror filters to customers, which didn't
really fix it properly.

The
crap in audioland is never ending. I'm glad I didn't have more money
starting out, or I'd be the proud owner of about 20K in speaker
wire...

be sure to use an 'audio grade' sd card:
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...ce-us160-low-n
oise-sr-64hxa-microsd-card/

I'm sure I'm one of those exceptional "Golden Ears" people, so I gotta
have one.

Seriously, though, it seems that most of the claims in photography can
be easily proven or disproven. Things tend to be more measurable,
whereas in audio, it's always, "it sounds better". The closest thing
I've seen in photography are the new claims about higher resolution
with the single pixel sensor shift. It's like someone else here
mentioned, you'd have to bolt the camera (along with the subject?) to
a block of concrete for that to make much, if any, difference. Foveon
sensors might belong in this discussion, but the claims are mostly
true, if misleading, or off-point.

On 5/25/2015 1:50 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 25 May 2015 13:23:33 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article ,
Whiskers wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't think there's nearly as much nonsense in the photo world. The
crap in audioland is never ending. I'm glad I didn't have more money
starting out, or I'd be the proud owner of about 20K in speaker
wire...


I haad a simpe way of buying speakers. I started with the cheapest, and
had them switch until I could not hear the difference. The ;ast set I
bought was vaery flat, because the room was qite vibrant. About two
months later my wife redecorated the room, makeing far more sound
absorbant. To solve my problem I found a pair of inexpensive tweeters
and when combined eith variable resistor, and properly placed they more
than solved the problem.


--
PeterN

On 2015-05-25, nospam wrote:
In article , Bill W
wrote:

Try telling a Leica fan that his favourite lens isn't as good as the
Zeiss equivalent (or vice versa). Then mention Swarovski Optik and ask
why they don't make camera lenses ...

leica fans rank right up there with audiophiles in believing things
that are not physically or mathematically possible.

I don't think there's nearly as much nonsense in the photo world.

perhaps not as many individual items, but the level of ignorance is
just as high.

leica digital cameras are nothing special (they're rebranded panasonic)
and in many cases, worse than other cameras. one example was the m8 and
the missing infrared cut filter which resulted in odd colour shifts.

leica ended up sending hot mirror filters to customers, which didn't
really fix it properly.

Those interested in economical infra-red photography demand to know
which Panasonic was rebranded as "Leica M8".

Leica made mistakes (or questionable technical decisions) before that,
and probably will again. Perhaps it's a passion thing.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~