OK, here's that roof again. 2 shots with the DA 16-45/4 at 4.0 1 with the M 28/3.5 at 3.5 1 with the A 28/2.8 at 2.8 All upsized to 300% All treated *exactly* the same way from exposure to web.
http://tinyurl.com/4axt4 **I CAN SEE, in the viewfinder, (with the 2x) detail in the shingles *far above* what shows in the DA samples! Both of the 28s give me what I expect, but not the DA. If someone else had processed these for me I would have accused them of intentionaly blurring the DA samples! I'm at a total loss to explain how I can see a highly detailed image in the viewfinder with all three lenses but only two of them give a detailed final result. Rob, in one of your posts you said: "Har told ya, also I suspect any visual focus error on the DA is likely due to a spherical field of focus." What exactly does that mean? Can a viewfinder and focus confirmation signal actually be wrong for one lens and OK for others? A D viewfinder is too small to be really critical, but with the 2x magnifier detail in the roof is very clear. I used the 2x for all shots on all three lenses. I used a sturdy tripod, placed the same for each. I used mirror pre-fire for all of them. I used 1/2000 or 1/4000 shutter speeds. 3 were focused manually, on the DA shot labeled "Take Three" I allowed the D to autofocus, it missed. I even focused ahead of and behind the lower pipe to see if it made a difference, it did, all those shots were worse, DA and 28s alike. I am 100% certain these are correctly focused and camera shake is not a factor. Lighting is a bit different in the M shot. What the Heck is going on here??????? Don
