Well that is an impressive amount of technical process to get that shot. I remember the bellows lens from early photography photos. My father taught me about f-stops when I was 12. I am shocked to hear that modern cameras do not go down to f-64. What is the world coming to.
Comparing the two shots I think they are both beautiful.The sharp focus photo is sharper than the human eye; my eye at least.
Yeah, but it's also really old technology that I used in a limited way decades ago. I wanted to learn the more powerful aspects of tilt and shift, and got a good lesson in that yesterday. The two shots are just different ways of looking at the same thing--but the one with focus is indeed a lot sharper. The reason behind it is diffraction: when light passes an edge, the wave aspect of light comes into play and messes with it (technical term, not!).
When you have a large aperture, only the edge of it is affected by diffraction, and the vast middle area remains sharp. But as you close down the aperture, the ratio between clean and diffracted changes dramatically, and the image gets less sharp. At f/64, the difference is really noticeable.
Today's lenses are amazingly sharp; back in the day, they could not manufacture lenses to such exacting standards. As a result, f/11 or f/64 were not hugely different. All the same, what would it hurt, one wonders, to have the ability to choose really small apertures today?
Well that is an impressive amount of technical process to get that shot. I remember the bellows lens from early photography photos. My father taught me about f-stops when I was 12. I am shocked to hear that modern cameras do not go down to f-64. What is the world coming to.
Comparing the two shots I think they are both beautiful.The sharp focus photo is sharper than the human eye; my eye at least.
Yeah, but it's also really old technology that I used in a limited way decades ago. I wanted to learn the more powerful aspects of tilt and shift, and got a good lesson in that yesterday. The two shots are just different ways of looking at the same thing--but the one with focus is indeed a lot sharper. The reason behind it is diffraction: when light passes an edge, the wave aspect of light comes into play and messes with it (technical term, not!).
When you have a large aperture, only the edge of it is affected by diffraction, and the vast middle area remains sharp. But as you close down the aperture, the ratio between clean and diffracted changes dramatically, and the image gets less sharp. At f/64, the difference is really noticeable.
Today's lenses are amazingly sharp; back in the day, they could not manufacture lenses to such exacting standards. As a result, f/11 or f/64 were not hugely different. All the same, what would it hurt, one wonders, to have the ability to choose really small apertures today?
Too funny! Choices are almost always good! That is a good explanation of diffraction. I think I basically understand.