If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
I was just musing and wanted some input from this group.
Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
"Bob Williams" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams The old adage stands: "Garbage in, garbage out". You cannot improve lens performance after acquiring the image. At best you can do what DxO software does, which is to compensate for vignetting, lens distortions and aberrations at each focal length of a given lens and at each aperture. I have it and it works quite well for what it does, but it makes no sense to try to incorporate it into the camera--much smater to make it a computer app as DxO has done, where it is easily updatable when new lenses come out or are added to the database. Toby |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
"Toby" wrote in message ... "Bob Williams" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams The old adage stands: "Garbage in, garbage out". You cannot improve lens performance after acquiring the image. At best you can do what DxO software does, which is to compensate for vignetting, lens distortions and aberrations at each focal length of a given lens and at each aperture. I have it and it works quite well for what it does, but it makes no sense to try to incorporate it into the camera--much smater to make it a computer app as DxO has done, where it is easily updatable when new lenses come out or are added to the database. Toby But I want a Ferrari for the price of a insert cheap, crap car from your country here, sorry but ya's got's ta payfor what you want to have..... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
Bob Williams wrote:
I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Sounded reasonable to me, back in 2006. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.p...4d36c425621dd3 BugBear |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
On Feb 27, 6:18 pm, Bob Williams wrote:
I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams Look up "deconvolution", "Richardson Lucy"... You can do some clever stuff, and with things like chromatic aberration and barrel/pincushion distortion a lot can be done 'reasonably effectively'.., but when it comes to 'deeper' optical issues, you run into a problem. The algorithms can't tell what may be real data against what is lens- induced data, and as soon as those two things *overlap* (as they do in most images), you run into trouble - eg the 'echoes' you will see in most deconvoluted images. So these systems are great for some things, and particularly useful in specialist areas like astronomy (stars being effectively point sources with little overlap). Quite useful for CA, very useful for perspective distortion, somewhat useful for reducing blur to distinguish/resolve details that weren't clear in the original, but at the cost of artefacts.. So can you achieve the equivalent of the finest Leica from a Helios and a bit of software? Nope. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
On Feb 27, 2:18 am, Bob Williams wrote:
I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams To some degree, but software cannot remove all problems shooting general subjects. The fancy stuff NASA and astronomers use makes a lot of assumptions about what the objects in images are. IF you know exactly the properties of an object are, you can optimize software to correct very well for lens imperfections. But, the result will only work in photographing that particular class of objects. When you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Nowhere more true than in image processing :-( As an example, a fuzzy outline on an object can look just like defocus. If you artificially sharpen it, then taking an image of a fuzzy object makes it look like it has a sharp edge! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
Bob Williams wrote:
: I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. : Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to : determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of : confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the : imperfections "of that lens design"? : If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. : Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some : or most of them would be a big advance. I think what you are proposing is called "image processing" and digital cameras already do that. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
In article ,
Bob Williams wrote: I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams First of all, the pattern of blur caused by the lens must be reversible. That's not always the case. Second, any processing of this kind destroys the precious S/N ratio. A lower S/N ratio means that the noise filter is going to do a lot more damage to the photo. Refocusing using a coded patterned aperture mask: http://www.merl.com/people/raskar/Mask/ Refocusing using a microlens array: http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/...era-150dpi.pdf -- I don't read Google's spam. Reply with another service. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:18:53 -0800, Bob Williams
wrote: I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams Add Helicon Focus and multi-shot capture to the body. And a big processor and battery. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
A "Superb" Lens
Don, I just want to say that I love your posts...always very informative and
informed. Toby "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... On Feb 27, 2:18 am, Bob Williams wrote: I was just musing and wanted some input from this group. Could a manufacturer design a GOOD lens and run a series of tests to determine the exact nature of its problems e.g.,large circle of confusion? Then with software, built into the camera, correct the imperfections "of that lens design"? If so, then one cold produce a a killer lens on the cheap. Even if ALL the imperfections could not be resolved, removing even some or most of them would be a big advance. Bob Williams To some degree, but software cannot remove all problems shooting general subjects. The fancy stuff NASA and astronomers use makes a lot of assumptions about what the objects in images are. IF you know exactly the properties of an object are, you can optimize software to correct very well for lens imperfections. But, the result will only work in photographing that particular class of objects. When you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Nowhere more true than in image processing :-( As an example, a fuzzy outline on an object can look just like defocus. If you artificially sharpen it, then taking an image of a fuzzy object makes it look like it has a sharp edge! |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Album 26 Special "January 2008-3" "Lumières d'Opale" | Lumières d'Opale | Digital Photography | 0 | February 7th 08 12:30 PM |
"Friends are born, not made." !!!! By: "Henry Brooks Adams" | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 1 | February 1st 07 02:25 PM |
How to insert the "modified time" attribute in "date taken" attrib in batch mode | ashjas | Digital Photography | 4 | November 8th 06 09:00 PM |
Test Report [again] "Gives superb results".... | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 3 | September 9th 06 09:38 AM |