On: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 Paul Roberts wrote:- >> "As regards the fringing, do not necessarily blame the camera as it can >> only record what falls on to the sensor" > I don't understand why the digital sensors are showing up 'weaknesses' in > the lenses.
Lenses that are computed for film take advantage of the physical depth of film emulsion. This helps to cancel out most chromatic abberation. Use of those same lenses with a digital sensor is made rather difficult due to the sensor being only one pixel thick - thus revealing what appear to be defects or weaknesses. It is entirely possible to remove those defects by post-production software such as PanoTools, et al. The more advanced digicams, such as the current Kodak full frame offering, can calibrate individual lenses using in-built firmware to make up for the fact that it is extremely difficult to focus a digicam - any digicam, due to the inherent restraints of available sensor technology. That does not mean it cannot be done..........! My gripe about digital cameramakers is they know perfectly well how to make a decent digicam, only they ration out the functionality using crippleware to extract more money from the customer, knowing that it is only a relative few who are savvy enough to use workarounds. Sooner or later the technology will flatten out, and that eventually digicams will become a standard, relatively cheap item with differing levels of sophistication of firmware provided at a matching price. I have to say this but digital capture is an infant technology, and if practitioners cannot accept that they are unpaid beta-testers for big business, then they really should do something else. William Curwen http://www.william.ws =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
