Timeline for My 18-55mm lens is "foggier" than I expect — is there something wrong?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:43 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://photo.stackexchange.com/ with https://photo.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 19, 2011 at 16:39 | comment | added | chills42 | Looking at mtf charts only tells you the performance of a lens wide open in lab conditions (See imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/mtf.htm). While this can be useful, it is not readily applicable to the situation as stated here since we are not comparing images that are taken wide open in both cases. | |
| May 19, 2011 at 15:22 | comment | added | MattiaG | see, the 18-55 is a pretty sharp lens. mtf charts on nikonusa.com; I had a quick look and it seems in the center (both at the wide and at the tele end) it's even sharper than the 35mm. using both of these lenses quite often, this doesn't sound so strange to me. so it's hard to tell. | |
| May 19, 2011 at 13:33 | comment | added | ElendilTheTall | Yes, not to mention the fact that A) prime lenses are inherently sharper than zooms and B) the Nikon 35mm is well known for being very sharp, especially when stopped down a little. | |
| May 19, 2011 at 12:47 | comment | added | mattdm | Another issue is simply that the 18-55 kit zoom has to have a lot more compromises, not just because it's a zoom, but because it's got to be cheap, even with must-have-to-sell features like VR. | |
| May 19, 2011 at 12:46 | comment | added | mattdm | I think the blurrier one is also focused a bit further back, but it's hard to tell. | |
| May 19, 2011 at 12:29 | history | answered | chills42 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |