Sharpness

[@joakimsundberg7622]

"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept" Is my favorit defence for all my blurred pic´s

[@storysupport]

Ha! 😀 Sounds like one needs class-theory to support their subjective decisions. I just go with “This is what I want it to look like”

[@BAstudios5]

LOL nice

[@richardsimms251]

An extremely knowledgeable professional with immense experience. Just appreciate him !!! He has so much to teach in his head !!! RS. Canada

[@DennisLimCY]

don't shy away from the technical stuff. go deep, go deeper, go as deep as the deepest of pixels. we can always re-watch the video 20 times to get what you are saying, but if it is not deep enough, then there is no where to go. thank you very much for the video. it is my goal to be far from the shallows. to crash through the surface, and onto the deep end.

[@MegaNardman]

The Lensrentals blog is a fountain of MTF knowledge, and I'd highly recommend anyone who wants to take a deeper dive to take a look there. (The fact that the company is great to work with is another, separate bonus, IMO)

[@JS-tc3kt]

The most valuable advice from the last video (#1) was “embrace the imperfections”. This is why I do minimal editing in post. A technically “perfect photo” is an exercise in chasing perfection from a technical standpoint. (Yeah, I know; circumlocution). The point is that you can edit an image to technical perfection WITHOUT adding anything of value to the image artistically. Almost all of the value in an image is in the context. That’s the part that makes us feel something special that we connect with in a photo. Perfect focus, razor sharpness, beautiful colors, and many other qualities can add value to the image but you can have a powerful photo even if all these are imperfect, but the subject/content/context are right. The reverse is not true. Wow, that’s a lot more than I thought I had to say!

[@Azertyvo]

This whole disclaimer part at the beginning ("I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings") lets you imagine how sensitive people can be when you daaaaaare insult their brand of choice. Ted, I assume you must have received loads of stupidly partisan comments, otherwise you wouldn't say this. If I were you, I'd be very tempted to suggest these moaning people a revolutionary way of using their lenses. I'm way more into your videos about the actual art of photography (the ones about great photographers), but your other videos are great too.

[@t.abarnett2393]

It's not often that I find a video that's not pure regurgitation, I really appreciate the knowledge you brought with this video 🙏

[@jbthementor4905]

You bring amazing value to the KZbin universe. I long to put out content just like you. I hope to get as good and bring that same knowledge base you present so effortlessly. Keep up the good work.

[@TheDecorama]

I've always been one of those "too afraid to ask" about MTF charts. THANK YOU for an excellent and comprehensive explanation that leaves me feeling comfortable with understanding them going forward. Don't apologize for going into technicalities - some of us need it! :)

[@shadowshapers]

As someone who has recently wanted to learn the in-depth about lenses and how to tell the specifics apart for each this video was immensely helpful. Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge with the KZbin for us!

[@rf8221]

Wow Ted I haven't heard anyone on KZbin nerd out on lens sharpness or lack thereof, simply excellent. I can't think of anyone better than you to speak on the subject that I would enjoy listening to than you. -Thank You

[@DanRawkt]

"hurt anyones feelings about your lenses" wtf is wrong with people?

[@arunashamal]

fuji fanboys...smh!

[@AustinKoontz]

Maybe he meant he didnt want to make people feel like their gear is not good/they need better gear to be a good photographer

[@IsmaelPedraza]

Don’t move away from technical videos just because some people find them boring. This is potentially the best video you’ve ever made

[@tedk2814]

I truly enjoyed this video and was "glued" to the monitor throughout. I can learn things here that I haven't seen on the majority of You Tube channels, Thanks, Ted

Thank you so much for sharing this amount of knowledge in one video

[@Doodliedee]

Hey Ted! Newbie photography hobbyist here, getting really into it since the COVID-19 lockdown. I absolutely love the videos that you do, they're very informative and extremely valuable. It is easy to tell that you know what you're talking about and there's no BS or ego behind your videos trying to show off how good you are (unlike some other youtubers). Thanks for the awesome content! Wishing you the best. LATER ;)

[@rezzab]

As ever your talks are always of great interest. I have some great glass, Zeiss, Leica, Sony, Minolta and Nikon, all very sharp and I love them but my most sold image was taken in the 1960's with an Olympus SLR with a Zuiko 50mm f2 lens, its an old lady walking down the street at night, out of focus, blur and the scanned negative was in a terrible state even after trying to clean it up, people seem to like it.

[@VictorWyatt]

I really appreciate you more technical episodes. They help me understand, at least to some extent, why this work a certain way without completely confusing me with details. They help me be a better judge of the equipment I own or am looking into buying. Thanks.

[@NatyMidnight]

There are a lot of knowledgeable people, not only on KZbin but in academic and I find your teaching style so much more engaging even if the content leaves me scratching my head-like this. 😂😅 will need to rewatch 100x. How do you so effortlessly talk about all this...Ted, you are photography knowledge goals.

[@i8910midnight]

i'm a hobbyist photographer, but i obsess about these youtube videos on photography and just gobble it all up. i've been doing this for 7 years almost every night, it take time, but you will get what he's saying once you've read and watched his and other good lecturers here on youtube.

[@JamesLavish]

Finally, someone points out Copy Variation! Great video Ted, super well done and accessible for most people, I imagine. I'll be pointing people to this explanation for years to come, I'm sure.

[@ericmanten7239]

A lot to digest here, but extremely valuable. Your video helped me to 'finally' get an understanding of what the MTF charts can show us and how to read them. Your most valuable comment, however, was to not let the MTF chart be your only reference when making a choice for a lens. Ideally, I always would like to shoot a lens before purchasing to see the actual images and decide what I like/don't like about them. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!!

[@rbruce63]

When dad bought me my first camera in 1978 a Yashica Electro 35 GSN he said what a luminous lens! Use it in the middle at F/8 or F/5.6 it’s where it will be at its sharpest! But what a great service this camera-lens gave to me: from high school all the way to my masters in the USA. And the pictures I made with her!

[@mattb.4333]

Don't feel the need to apologize to haters. I come here to learn because I respect your expertise and people that truly want to learn would not argue petty brand loyalty driven arguments. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

[@felipevielmo]

MTF charts had already came to my attention but this video is a masterclass.

[@deanbenninger]

Awesome Explanation Ted!!! Thank You for Explaining MTF Charts in Easy to Understand Detail!!!

[@merlin357]

I've always wondered if the focus plane was flat or not! Didn't know that's what field curvature was, thanks!

[@stacy6903]

Lately I've been looking at KZbin videos about MTF charts, and this one is one of the tops for me!

[@Rene-DdW]

Fantastic serie. Thanks!

[@peterkaltoft8032]

Really appreciate what you're doing here. I've begun to shoot much more manual focus lately, and have begun to look for manual focus lenses because of this. This made me very interested in lenses on another level, besides just the normal hyped subjects, really to understand how lenses work. Your series here comes as a god sent 🙂

[@giselesmith7795]

Thank you Ted, for adding to my knowledge and understanding of the lens. I love this series.

[@jonlouis2582]

Very good concise explanation. When I was new to photography I was all about sharpness, but I don't think about it much anymore. I have been lucky enough to see some great photographs from masters of photography in person, and a lot of them were not really sharp. If an image is great, no one will care about how sharp it is.

[@alexanderpons9246]

Loved this video, yes you got technical but in a way that all of us can learn from it! Thanks for emphasizing the fact that in the end a great image its not attached to gear, in the end depending on each persons budget we all get the best we can afford. Anyway, thanks for loving Photography so much and for sharing such great material through your channel Ted Forbes!

[@CharlesMcKeever]

Absolutely love this series! Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!

[@lightbox617]

Thanks for dealing with the tech so clearly. My first consideration in a lens purchase is price. Yes, I do the research online regarding sharpness including corner to corner even ness of light . I don't generally need great low light capability. Most of the range I shoot is 5.6 to 8. Tamron, Sigma and Canon all make lenses that serve my needs and I have one of each ranging from 10mm to 300 mm zooms. For the last ten years, only once have I spent more than $500 for a lens

[@Isaacimage]

Priceless !!! Thank you

[@brakel8r]

if you hurt anyones feelings by trying to help and more importantly educate....they are beyond help and know everything thanks for the reviews

[@greg2337]

The Padauk is a nice touch on that filter holder

[@lawrencev.athill7502]

A very enjoyable synopsis of your definitions. I didn't hear ant bias just objectivity. Thank you.

[@lefthandright01]

It is a tough subject to cover. In a forum that I am a member of, another user had an issue with one of their lenses calibration. They were sure it was fixable,and the repair agent suggest if they need a replacement, that the tamron 35 is the sharpest lens on the market currently. They returned to the forum asking for others experience with the lens. The tamron is M.T.F sharp..so if your planing on shooting black bulls eye's on white grounds, and carefully measuring the chromatic aberration and coma, it will excel. We ask her to return to the store and inquire about colour fidelity, colour saturation and shadow acquence (always spell that word wrong.) The sales person replied what we all knew he would. "We don't test that." To add more mud to the situation, when you look at Fuji, Canon, Nikon M.T.F charts..they aren't standarised. each uses their own testing. So a low M.T.F by one manufacture, maybe the a high score on another's. Just the same as the exposure value of 200 ISo on the fuji, canon, panasonic etc will not give the same exposure with exact settings...as the ISO/ASA for film was standardised..however it isn't standarised in digital.

[@danielleswain2729]

I do enjoy the 'LensDays'... 1 thing; don't forget about lens adapters, to get these lenses on all types of cameras. Thanks for what you do and happy holidays

[@YehoshuaDerovan]

I recently read lots of Roger's stuff about copy variation on his website. Fascinating content. It's cool you mentioned him. Great series! Keep it coming! Cheers!!

[@OldGirlPhotography]

I just have one question: how is all of this information inside your head? Another awesome vid, Ted. Just the perfect level of detail. Give me more.

[@j.fontaine2491]

Without question, you're my favorite camera (and lens) geek. Thank you for another informative video.

[@erichstocker8358]

Great comments and wonderfully useful and informative information. I don’t really understand the “cry outs” about some lens. Generally lenses are so good nowadays and they vary in how they apply the “compromises”. I have a particular camera and I don’t worry about other camera lenses. I just look for the best manufacturer or third-party lens that appeals to me. So what other manufacturer produces is not germane to my search. I’m certainly not changing my camera because another manufacturer has a lens that might appeal more to me. It just does’t fit into my search space. Also I don’t look at my pixels at 2x or 3x. I think your discussions are really useful of these types of searches.

[@adeinewallacephotography]

Very informative! Thank you for sharing.

[@Lieveke]

I believe that the importance of sharpness is not only dominant because we can measure it, but because it's a very primitive survival mechanism in our eyes that has been refined over millions of years. It's subjective too which means that we see important things sharper than less important things. Which is why sharpening is really manipulating and telling your audience what they need to find important. As well as no loss of information of course, both technically and psychologically important.

[@alexlovell7830]

Great video. Very clear explanation. That summilux 35 is awesome.

[@AdamMuise]

Great video again Ted. I'm sure you have it as a subject, but I would to know what coatings do inside and outside of the lens. What did coating technology look like over the years? What practical difference is it making in lenses today?

[@thinkfreefilmsllc8559]

I love the series so far !!

[@dougsmit1]

Another interesting one... It might be nice to address how sharpness results are affected by factors like pixel density, internal (vs. extension) focusing and coatings. There is also the question of hardware sharpness vs. processed sharpness by regular RAW converters and AI programs like Topaz. On a lark I shot some images with lenses that had been in the attic since I retired my view cameras 20-30 years ago. Of the ones I used, the best was a Zeiss 15cm Doppel-Amatar f/6.8 (a six element symmetrical Dagor rip-off/modification) at f/11 which I had used in the 70's and 80's on 4x5 with a lot of movements and 5x7 straight on. It's sharpness was not at all bad but I was equally impressed that the shutter worked as well as it had 'in the day'. It was fun. When you are retired and doing photo as a hobby, fun is what it is all about.

[@Beakerzor]

you words are sharper than any lens we can ever buy! 🔪 don't ever change, sir!

[@josephhawk1]

this is a fantastic series, keep it going!

[@zx7-rr486]

Lens sharpness and sensor MP count, probably the most misunderstood, over-hyped and least important things to good photography. I think your video makes that pretty clear, whilst doing a good job of explaining contrast "sharpness". Some of my favourite lenses are not rated as particularly sharp. A good example, I have a Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6 zoom. It's really cheap (even new). The expert reviews are extremely dismissive of this lens, the MTF charts are also not that impressive. But I get great images from mine, both on 35mm film and FF digital. In my experience, there are very few lenses out there you can't get great pictures form if you work to their strengths.

[@cinnamon--girl]

Bravo Ted! AN excellent discussion on a somewhat boring but important technical topic. Five Stars!!

[@jrwpixcom]

BINGO! Thank you for the single BEST lens explanation I’ve ever encountered! Lenses are our paint brushes, thus it’s necessary to know what effect our instrument will have between us and what we desire to create. Brilliant +++!

[@achimrecktenwald9671]

Hello Ted, this theoretical stuff interests me. Could you recommend a good book about lenses?

[@s.vortex]

I think it's silly to complain about a lens being too sharp! When they upgrade to bigger megapixel cameras they're going to appreciate the sharpness. It's much easier to unsharpen an image rather than the opposite.

[@nohandle54]

One of the most informative things I’ve watched on KZbin - thanks!

[@mugshot749]

Hi Ted, although I agree with your statement about a lens been "too sharp for female portraits", I disagree that " Sharpness is purely due to contrast " ignores the factor of resolution, because you can get high resolution images that if they are low contrast don't look particularly sharp and vice versa.

[@luigit2341]

Thank you for clarifying MTF charts.

[@muatao9943]

Wow so educational! So the lines that you referred to, are they printed on paper? And is the lens then focused on the lines and the contrast measured as the light exits the back of the lens?

[@SkinsFirstGeneration]

Never stop lensdays!!

[@wayjeng5186]

A lot of people say that cameras don't really matter anymore because literally any camera on the market today is miles and away better than anything that was ever produced even 10 years ago. There's literally not a bad camera on the market. They're all great. I'm curious, do you think something similar is true of lenses? Do lenses even matter anymore (assuming we're not bokeh obsessed)? Or are they also so good that it really doesn't matter what lens you use to get the shot you want, because they're all basically sharp enough? I'll say for myself, I used to think lenses mattered a lot, and I spent a lot of time thinking about what lens I wanted next, and spending money on lenses trying to get the 'perfect' lenses to get the very best possible images. But then I realized, I could rarely tell what lens I'd shot a photo with without looking at the raw file's metadata. And it turned out that a lot of images I really liked were shot on an objectively poor superzoom lens. Since then, I think I've been less obsessed with making sure I have the newest, sharpest lenses.

[@chunglinglo9687]

love this episode! thanks Ted!

[@sanu4frndzs]

I am impressed by your "LENSDAYS" videos. Pleas keep it going.

[@johnhjic2]

Very nicely articulated.

[@alekseykonovalik5965]

Hey! Are you planning to do more photography assignments? Watching the playlist, that's cool!

[@stevenwaldstein2249]

Simply thank you. A great new series I automatically subscribed to.

[@boredgrass]

Very interesting and instructive!

[@heliaskes]

Been following your channel for a while now, but today, Ted, I salute you! Please keep on demystifying and explaining! Thanks- wholeheartedly!

[@JasonWebberYT]

Ted you're amazing!!! You have an impressive way of teaching a topic that is traditionally boring but making it engaging. Can't wait for the next Lensdays episode!

[@MrArunavadatta]

Thanks for explaining so lucidly..

[@WatchesAndPhotography]

Ted, great video, but some of us want to learn more about the technical aspects of optics. I think you can get more technical, since your premise is very technical to begin with. Anyway, love this new Lensdays series.

[@diyextravaganza]

Thanks for the video, I always wondered what those charts meant.

[@tonylosternau8110]

you are the man...we explain things very sililar,so i thoroghly enjoy all your videos.thx for what you do

[@DevinMack]

Good point since many lens manufactures may source their glass from the same place.

[@SteveMillerhuntingforfood]

Ted, this is one of the best series you've done in a while. It's why I'm a subscriber to your channel. Thank you!

[@diane-s3391]

Good educational video! Thanks Ted!

[@emmanuelokpeh4941]

Pls talk about histogram in Photoshop or camera to see if an image is okay or not

[@williaminbody205]

I’d like to see something about buying a new lens and determining that you have a good copy and how to tell if you got a bad copy and should return it for another copy.

[@Chris-ey7zy]

Decentered lenses biggest factor

[@WillN2Go1]

Reading customer reviews at B&H and Adorama, there's a lot of complaining (probably mostly for less expensive off brand lenses) about getting a lens that had uneven focus, and then trying another one, and then another one... Basically, lenses that are inconsistent to the standard specs. So MTF tests sound like something we should all be doing. Wide open aperture or stopped down? It seems obvious, but at the most typical working aperture(s) would be best. For some lenses this would be wide open, but often as not 2-3 stops down from there, and on some lenses, like my view camera lenses also at the smallest apertures. (There's a point where f64 isn't as sharp as f32. So unless you really need the depth of field, you know f64 is there, but f32 unless the DOF is needed is the sweet spot.) Something to keep in mind while testing MTF charts is distance. If the chart is on a wall 4 meters away, with longer focal lengths, you'll never be seeing the edges of that lens. And of course it's almost 2020. Huge megapixels, lens corrections in LightRoom, make a lot of lens problems no longer problems. (I explained to an Adobe engineer at MacWorld in the late 90s the distortion of the Schneider 90mm, and the extreme vignetting (I always used the filters). He said that wouldn't be at all hard to solve digitially.) Here's a boast (an obscure boast). One of my 7th grade students fiddling around with those plastic educational lens kits said, "Mister, it (the image) isn't bigger or smaller, but it's clearer." I looked. She had three lenses and the image was sharper because there was less color fringing. In the back of my head Ansel Adams was saying 'Cooke triplet' So I looked it up. This 7th grade girl had re-discovered the Cooke Triplet, first invented about 1890. Cooke is still in business making the highest quality lenses for cinematography. The thing about the triplet is they could've been invented decades before they were, but they weren't. Of course she didn't know anything about optical design, but she was observant. That was about 8 years ago-- she's probably working at McDonald's, she should be at Panavision or Cooke.

[@davejones4823]

Excellent technical presentation on lens performance but would be good to emphasise that, for a lot of creative applications at least, sharpness isn't absolutely necessary. Just need to look at Keith Carter's beautiful images - barely a sharp bit to be seen. Photographers obsess with zooming to 600% to check out detail - just not important (possible exception of commercial photography where the client will be doing the same). Also a lot is made of edge/corner sharpness - unless this is where your subject is placed, often corner sharpness can create distractions - a bit of softness helps direct attention to the subject. Anyway, great stuff Ted as always.

[@csabytheone]

Very helpful, thank you. Now I have work to do... I have this idea: to draw a bunch of these lines you have shown and print a large surface (my window for example) then take pictures of it with my 18-55 zoom at some F values. In my mind, however, I always thought that the more close the lenses are to each other in a zoom type lens, the less distortion is prone to occur (this is the case in my 18-55 that around the 35mm value is the most compacted position between the elements, but what do I know about them? haha), and will compare the results of which shows more sharpness at least in the middle. Thank you again I love you being technical :) . God bless.

[@sohocheckmate2897]

Thanks for the fantastic content!

[@forneverarrow]

Very revealing analysis! Personally, I prefer a little less sharpness for artistic purposes and sometimes my lens needs unsharpening in post to much my taste (I often use some negative clarity and/or lower sharpening setting locally). But to be honest, sharpness is the most valuable aspect in modern photography, especially with todays high megapixel counts. I just rather prefer to have the extra sharpness and reduce it in post than to have a less sharp lens… that gives me choices.

[@njihia]

Excellent video! I got a lot of value from this episode. PS: DONT SHY AWAY FROM THE REALLY TECHNICAL STUFF!! ITS WHY MOST OF US ARE HERE!!(i think).

[@nayuki2020]

What is micro-contrast? How do you interpret that from an MTF chart (if it's possible)?

[@evenios2831]

yay you brought up the 135mm g master ! i just ordered it one of the sharpest i hear! cant wait to get it :-)

[@karolstepien3067]

Is chromatic aberration not indicated by separation of sagittal and tangential curves?

[@bollinmorris2]

So many truths, so much information! Thank you!

[@marc5279]

i would say that sharpness is also a matter of every individual lens. Maybe not a problem with high end primes though. But i found myself, more than once and under manual focus testing, noticing quiet a difference in sharpness between 2 lenses of the same brand and model (both times with zooms)

[@CherryandTrevor]

You are a well spoken young man.

[@ANNAKKi]

Man this is some serious info. If only I was not so stupid I would of learned much. I am staying tuned to change that fact.

[@emilyfitzowich5396]

I actually love hearing this kind of technical stuff. A lot of camera/photography youtubers don't have or don't share this kind of knowledge, so I find it very interesting. Please more videos like this!

[@WayneLLC]

Honestly at the end of 16 mins, i thought you could go on for another 1-2 hours and i would still have watched it keenly. Thank you for this series. Truly, Wayne

[@kurgo_]

Excellent video, I'm really enjoying this series, can't wait for the next ones. Also, I think the word you're looking for is that people get "tribal" about their brands, rather than territorial :) plenty of people (shocking too, considering that the majority of users is way on the older side, you'd think they wouldn't be this childish) link their own ego and person to their favourite brand and thusly, any attack or perceived slight to their brand is taken personally.

[@forrestsalamida3721]

As a technical person - I appreciated this

[@adventure_photo]

Thanks for the great explanations Ted! Love your channel!👍

[@AurelioToral]

fantastic video!!! thanks!

[@felixmorsdorf1391]

Great value! I learned a lot...