Digital BW, The Print

Paul,

If you want to get the best out of the 5D2 wide angle, get some of the new
Zeiss lenses for Canon.
I have used them on the D2x / D3 and they are head and shoulders above the
Nikon lens in resolution and contrast when wide open -  F8. Note that based
on sensor pixel pitch the 5D2 is probably diffraction limited from about
F5.6 so you have to use a lens that is great at 5.6 or wider to have a
chance of maxing out the sensor. But of course F5.6 is not very compatible
with most landscape photography, so you may find the 5D2 is not much better
@ f16 than the 5D1 !!  One of the challenges of digital photography.

See Lloyd Chambers discussion of the 21 mpixel full frame diffraction issues
(based on 1Ds MK3, but still 100% relevant).
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/Diffraction/example-1DsM3.html

Mike



2008/9/27 pr_roark <pr_roark@...>

>   Hi Clayton,
>
> >... I'd like to see the same subject taken with a 12mp
> > or greater modern DSLR with equivalent lens.
>
> I'm interested in DSLR sharpness or resolution also -- not
> necessarily directly comparing to the test Tyler ran, but to the
> issues of how to get the most out of the DSLR systems, as it relates
> to the type of B&W I do. From my large display landscape
> perspective, resolution was always a significant factor for me.
>
> I've tried for years to have at least some objective criteria. The
> bottom line for resolution has been 5 pl/mm at display size -- where
> I use 16x20 as the main target. 5 lp/mm is what many believe is the
> approximate limit of our eyes at "normal" viewing distance, but with
> the caveat that edge detection visual systems can distinquish higher
> frequencies. (The 5D2 is close on paper, so that is part of why I'm
> going there.)
>
> Optics are an obvious variable I've tried to learn something about.
> Most lens reviews are, however, almost useless in predicting the
> level of performance I want. I've found the MTF curves to be more
> useful, particularly the high resolution (40 lp/mm) tests at
> http://www.photodo.com/products.html (but they're aging).
>
> See also http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~ashon/photo/comparo6.htm for a
> convenient colection of Canon lens MTF charts. These look like what
> Canon publishes on its site, but arranged conveniently.
>
> Note the definitions of the terms.
>
> Right now, I'm inclined to think that the meridonial MTF performance
> at f8 and at the edge of the frame (18 mm out) may be very
> significant for the performance I'm looking for.
>
> See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/MTF-Canon35f2.jpg and look at
> the meridonial MTF measures.
>
> So, right now, while I expect film to take my serious wide angle
> business for a while longer, the Canon 35mm f2 is going to be my
> first attempt at getting the most out of the 5D2 on the wide-normal
> side (with 2-fram shots taking me wider). With the 90 TS, I think
> I'll have my best shot at what I'm looking for.
>
> I'll let you know if the MTF meridonial measure correlation to
> performance continues to hold.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>
>
> 
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]