SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Digital Photography
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Done, gone. who wrote (7575)4/24/2004 5:37:58 PM
From: Mike Buckley  Read Replies (1) of 21646
 
Michal,

The test photos were made from distances ranging from 40cm (16") to 1.5m (5'). That's not really macro ... Their center spot AF should be tack sharp for this distance range

I stand corrected about the distance between the subject and the lens. Thanks for that.

In my mind, you're absolutely correct about requirements. It's so inexcusable if it isn't tack sharp at those distances that the product should be recalled. When tightly focusing on a portrait (as just one example) and intentionally using a limited depth of field, the results can be very different than what the center spot is indicating.

I don't buy the argument that you should be able to see whether the subject is in focus and that, therefore, it doesn't matter if the center-spot mechanism is working accurately. The sole purpose of a focusing prism (or whatever focusing technology is used) is to aid rather than deceive the user in determining the part of the image that has optimal clarity.

--Mike Buckley
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News