• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Have I hit the limit of my camera?

John Sheehy

New member
Fred Tedsen said:
Hi Stuart,
The 350D (and 20D) is "diffraction limited" at about f11, which means that the image will begin to look softer as the aperature gets smaller.

In my experience, you need to go way past the so-called "diffraction limit" before sharpening can't rescue the image. Diffraction decreases the contrast of neighboring pixels; it does not eliminate it. I would not sacrifice desired DOF just to stay below the diffraction limit.
 

Jörgen Nyberg

New member
Asher Kelman said:
Well, it's a pity Jörgen that we can't use that lens on a 1DsII or hte 5D!~


Asher

Yes, it is. I think this is one of the best (most bang for the bucks) lenses, that Canon has realesed in recent years. I some times use it as WA-lens, and it's an excellent portraitlens, I haven't had my 50/1.8 on the camera since I bought the EF-S60.

My brother (first testshot with the EF-S60), sry about the background:

normal__MG_0600-01.jpg


Jörgen
 
John Sheehy said:
In my experience, you need to go way past the so-called "diffraction limit" before sharpening can't rescue the image. Diffraction decreases the contrast of neighboring pixels; it does not eliminate it. I would not sacrifice desired DOF just to stay below the diffraction limit.

Past f/14 the XT/350D goes soft. By f/18 you are losing pixel level details like the facets of a dragonfly's eyes. f/16 is acceptable, but f/14 is better if you want to print large from my experience.

And for truly tiny creatures (3-5 mm long) I find f/10 to be better when every pixel counts.

enjoy,

Sean
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Sean and John.

The lenses are generally showing more resolution at wider apertures all other things being equal as reducing aperture causes progressive resolution loss albeit with remarkable increase in depth of field.

Zeiss and Leica take advantage of this by grinding the lens well so that the larger apertures can indeed live up to this potential.

Asher
 

KrisCarnmarker

New member
Asher, if I remember correctly, Canon launched the EF-S 60mm as a means for non full-frame users to get a macro lens with the traditional and popular 100mm focal length.

If you are on a full-frame camera, you have the 100mm Macro, which is a fantastic lens, IMO.
 
Top