@photozone team
I am just wondering whether you have ever made a handheld shot of your usual resolution test target and, if yes, whether the difference in resolution between a handheld shot and a tripod mounted shot is significant.
For instance, if the tested center resolution of a mFT lens is 2500lp, what would be the resolution of a handheld shot? I understand that a difference of 200lp is still barely visible.
Background of my question: I would like to figure out how important the lens resolution is in real life where I mostly make handheld shots.
Thanks!
Good question.
I cannot give you a answer because I'm one of the few member here who shoot at tripod and most likely at maual focus and IS/VR switched off.
I also wonder what's going on when you switch on all features like - IS, AF and shoot handheld.
[quote name='Tiz' timestamp='1329203663' post='15827']
..... I would like to figure out how important the lens resolution is in real life where I mostly make handheld shots.
Thanks!
[/quote]
.....1/1600th stops shake or motion smear at 300mm (or less) on my aps-c camera - nothing less appears to work for the hands i've been given - i don't use IS/VR because objects in these shots are generally in motion too, so a slower shutter speed will make for blur -
- so, the chart should also be sharp imo if k/mst/seb can keep the chart within the frame straight on handheld - Bc is giving steadyhand lessons -
.....lens rez/contrast/colour is everything and so is bokeh - shouldn't be too hard?
[quote name='Tiz' timestamp='1329203663' post='15827']
@photozone team
I am just wondering whether you have ever made a handheld shot of your usual resolution test target and, if yes, whether the difference in resolution between a handheld shot and a tripod mounted shot is significant.
For instance, if the tested center resolution of a mFT lens is 2500lp, what would be the resolution of a handheld shot? I understand that a difference of 200lp is still barely visible.
Background of my question: I would like to figure out how important the lens resolution is in real life where I mostly make handheld shots.
Thanks!
[/quote]
Quite a cool experiment. Would be a nice "feature article" IMHO. Not a "per lens" test to be repeated though.
I don't get it... You are adding unsharpness, it is not one source of unsharpness masking the other. So... If you have not such a sharp lens, and add a small amount of movement unsharpness, you get an less sharp image than when you have used a sharper lens.
It would be like a competition, who's hands are more shaky <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> . IMO it's like rolling a die and guessing the results - sometimes you will (like similar but not better results from test in controlled environment), but in most cases you will not (motion and out-of-focus blur, that will vary from shot to shot).
A.