No its not a case for cropping win you have degraded the image quality GREATLY with your previous examples. Your 200 mill lens probably has less resolving power then you 50 in either case. So you are most likely better off moving closer with your 50. And you again have missed the point entirely in that FRAMING IS NOT CROPPING.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 10:23 PM, karl shah-jenner <shahjen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Little" <randyslittle@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: June 1, 2013 Reviews
well gosh Randy - that goes without saying.. but since you like a good argument, let's make it easier for youOn Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:57 PM, karl shah-jenner <shahjen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
As to cropping - I could take a nice picture of a subject, say a face
with the best lens (imo) for the job - say a 200mm lens - or I could shoot
that face with a 100mm, 50mm or even a 16mm. As long as I maintain the
correct perspective for the photo I can then crop any of these images and
get an identical image to that had I used the correct long lens in the
first place. The only difference is one is cropped by the lens, one is
cropped in the darkroom.
They only difference is the magnification in the dark room results in a
lose of resolution IN ALL CASES. You do not have the same image you have
a smaller version of the same image with each corresponding lens field of
view. so if you where trying to get the SAME image quality. You would
not. You would have the same problem in both film and digital that you
are SCALING in the very very wrong place unless you like Grain or scaling
artifacts.
I shoot the 200mm shot with 3200 film, pushed or not, develop with some solvent based 'soft grain' developer..
then I shoot the 50mm shot with tech pan and dev in Rodinal
now which has the higher resolution?
the fact is the elements of the image remain the same. Case for cropping.. win
