Re: soft digital

Terry <terry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> · Wed, 09 Nov 2005 08:22:29 -0700

I have a 1DS, not the MkII wish it was though, 
anyway I also have a 10D, I have two canon lenses that on the 10D are 
acceptable, I suppose because the smaller sensor only uses the center part of 
the lens, those same lenses are terrible on the 1Ds. I have one lens that I love 
on both cameras but some times the image seams softer then others and I have no 
idea what the difference is, they can be under the same circumstances, just 
softer some times, however post sharpening via unsharp mask always seams to take 
care of it, if it were me I really would do the brick wall test mentioned 
earlier.
Terry L. Mair
Mair's Photography
158 South 580 East
Midway, Utah 
84049
435-654-3607
www.mairsphotography.com

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: 
  Herschel 
  Mair 
  To: List for Photo/Imaging 
  Educators - Professionals - Students 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 11:06 
  PM
  Subject: soft digital

  Joseph
  Firstly I must say that 
  I'm a little embarrassed by some of the responses you got from this 
  list.
  I am also a person who 
  works extensively with Nikon and Canon. I have just bought the Nikon D2x and 
  it?s a fine camera but it?s not in the league of the Canon 1DS MkII. I don?t 
  have the 2 lenses you?re complaining about but I have Excellent Canon and 
  excellent Nikon lenses. So far I have been ecstatic with the Canon lenses I 
  have bought. The focus much quicker and far more accurately and the results 
  have been really excellent

  But there are a few Nikon 
  lenses that are awesome too and I wouldn?t like to have to stop using 
  them.

  I think the problem may 
  be digital

  In simple terms, all 
  digital cameras have a sort of "diffuser" right in front of the sensor. This 
  is to "spread" the colors around and make each photo-site more aware of what 
  is happening in the surrounding photo-sites. 
  In the process 
  of turning photo-sites of a single color into pixels of RGB, 
  ("Demosaicing") the fuzziness is theoretically removed... But you 
  can observe that raw images on a monitor don't have quite the acutance 
  that prints from negatives do, or for that matter high-res scans of film or 
  prints.
  The thing is that you 
  HAVE to do a certain amount of USM to all digital raw images. They are 
  inherently softer, with lower edge contrast, than you'd expect.

  If you shoot JPG, the 
  camera does it for you (Not a bad job usually) Of course you end up replacing 
  REAL acutance with APARENT sharpness.

  Also there?s the problem 
  that you are probably  viewing at 72DPI.  You have not said whether you made 
  prints or not. 

  Then, of course, there?s 
  the possibility (Blasphemy in Canonland) that those particular Canon lenses 
  are simply not as good as the Nikon equivalents. In which case, what?s there 
  to say?

  Herschel

  Herschel Mair
Head 
  of the Department of Photography,
  Higher College of Technology
Muscat
Sultanate of Oman 
  Adobe Certified 
  instructor

  + (986) 99899 673

  www.herschelmair.com

  Yahoo! 
  FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. 