>Thanks Brian. Wise words indeed. > >If I can raise a couple of further points, having looked at >the detailed EXIF data for the focus tests? > >They're shot at f/8, when the advice of the designer of the >focus test is to shoot wide open. Why? > >They're not shot with the chart completely filling the frame, >also against the advice of the designer. Why? > >They're shot with a range of shutter speeds down from 1/100 to >1/25 which suggests very variable lighting (2 stops). > >Also 1/25???? What about the effects of mirror slap? I don't >go to these sorts of shutter speeds without using MUP and a >cable release. > >A few microns of movement and you're starting to blur >pixels.... > >I'm not wishing to be argumentative or confrontational, but >how can the results be considered valid when the experimental >method is fundamentally flawed? >
Hello....I used every aperture setting when I shot these charts and the results are all the same......I posted these shots at F8 because the depth of field is greater in front and behind the focus point than at F 2.8 ......If I cannot get a sharp picture at F8 then all the other aperture settings will be just as bad if not worse.......The slow shutter speeds make no difference with the test results and you can clearly see where the focus is on my pictures which have no motion blur from mirror slap......I have taken my camera outside on a tripod and used shutter speeds between 5000 and 8000 and taken pictures of car license plates and the Live View focus is always sharper than through the viewfinder....I also magnified the photos and you can really tell the difference in the sharpness when this is done.