> Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 20:18:38 +0100 > From: Michael Quack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: EOS Which lenses with a D60? > > > Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 20:28:27 -0200 > > From: "Nelson Ricciardi" > > Subject: Re: EOS Which lenses with a D60? > > > > Check this > > > http://www.stevedunn.ca/photos/writings/eflenses.html > > But note that this link is about a test > performed with > film! The problem is the very small sensor > structure > which exceeds the capabilities of the lens, > which can > also be seen in the Photodo MTF curves (40 > lp/mm is the > thing to look at). The difference is much more > pronounced > with the D60 than it possibly can be with film. > [...] > > Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 15:44:47 -0800 > > From: "Skip Middleton" > > Subject: Re: EOS Which lenses with a D60? > > > I have tack sharp 11x14 enlargements using > Plus-X and that lens, > > Bingo. You used it with film. > The chip is much less forgiving on fine > details. > Plus the fact that the tack sharp thing in > prints from film > can as well be film grain, which mustn't be > image information > at the same time. > > > so what you are basically saying is that the > D60, at 6mp, will > > outperform Plus-X, XP-2 and APX 100, all > films that I have > > used the lens with and with great success, > right? > > In relation to the sensor size - yes. Film has > an edge for > the bigger imaging area, but cropped to DSLR > sensor size, > the difference starts to show, and it shows > very much in > higher frequencies, where a lens like the > 28-135 is noticably > softer than e.g. the 2.5/50 mm macro or the > 1.2/85 mm L. > > You just don't notice the difference as much on > film > since 1) you see sharp film grain, which is not > necessarily > image detail and 2) digital works like a > bandpass, where > with increasing chip resolution the point of > failure > "pops out" on some lenses. > > So, in the end the 28-135 is not a bad lens, in > fact > it might be better than many others, certainly > better > than the usual set zooms, but not good enough > to make > up with what the sensor of the D60 can do. >
Let me see if I follow you. You say that the 28-135 doesn't deliver to the capabilities of the D60 because you have to cropp and some deficiencies of the lens are going to show? Because the 28-70L is a better lens, image on a D60 is going to be better, right? So if Canon makes tomorrow a very cheap DSLR, 6MP with 3x manifying factor, the 28-135 is really going to suck, right? Well, I think that in that camera, even the 28-70L is going to suck but not because the lenses can't deliver to the camera *standards* but because the camera can't deliver to the standard is meant to be, and that's a 35mm film or (guess) a full size sensor. The 28-135 is a very decent lens capable of making a center fold image on an EOS 1v and maybe a 1Ds. If the D60's sensor is smaller therefore some distortions are going to show when enlarged, is not 28-135's fault. That would be like saying that the 28-70L can't deliver to 135 standards because when cropped, some distortions start showing. I think we should keep in mind that the *standard* is FILM. Nothing performs better than a good L glass + excellent film. Digital have brought a lot of advantages and changes into photography, specially for PJ, but is digital who have to catch up with film standards and not the other way around. Cheers, Carlos _______________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger Nueva versi�n: Webcam, voz, y mucho m�s �Gratis! Desc�rgalo ya desde http://messenger.yahoo.es * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
