post a super sharp image in this thread

[RalphLambrecht]

OK, just to play along, this is a sharp photo from my pre-war Kodak Bantam Special:

5x7 Print by Rob F, on Flickr

Below is a crop:

Crop by Rob F, on Flickr

Is that Lee Harvey Oswald?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

John's asking people to post images where sharpness is most important to them, that's not a test. We have to live with the facts that scans, resizing etc makes a difference.

A few years ago I posted an extremely sharp image on this forum, I think shot on EFKE 25 but with a 10x8 camera,
Ian

I assume a 10x8 camera is an 8x10 portrait camera used for landscapes:confused:

 

[removed account4]

another sharp one
sumayadda yadda lens, pan f ( from what i can remember )
and a combination of dektol and coffee developer, nothing fancy

 

[OptiKen]

 

[Arklatexian]

I really like that bridge-lift photo. Very reminiscent of Feininger. It is sharp, but that's not what makes the photo.

Looking at this image reminded me that I have never seen a pre-WW2 Bantam Special that came with a coated lens from the factory and looking at this picture tells me that they sure did not need one for black and white photography. Makes me sort of think that coated lenses are not really needed for B&W. The ones that I saw and handled had f2 Ektar lenses....Regards!

 

[RobC]

This ones got sharp grain.

 

[RobC]

And here's some claiming to be super sharp and resolving 80meters per pixel.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-35013190

 

[pentaxpete]

Here is one taken at full aperture on my 'gift' Minolta MD Zoom 35-70mm f3.5 1981 era on the X-700 -- it is faulty at 'infinity' I discovered but really sharp at nearer subjects -- there is some 'play' in teh lens mount and chrome mounting ring at rear -- former owner did not look after it !
X-700 test 07 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr

 

[sagai]

I had this before made me surprised.
Agfa APX 400 in Rodinal with a Praktica BMS having a pentacon 50/1.8 on its nose.

 

[removed account4]

sharp image from a glass plate
4x5 plate enlarged onto an 8x10 sheet of paper
manmade hand made negatives

 

[HiHoSilver]

Sagai, that is a spectacular shot. Bravo!

 

[frank]

'69-'79 Summicron 50, M5, HP5+, Ilfosol

 

[removed account4]

...

 

[ManicPixie]

Rolleiflex Automat + Delta 3200

 

[michaelorr]

Posting a reply because I have not uploaded an image yet, on APUG - learning the ropes and limitations.

All I have to say about this - A little lens tilt goes a long way.

The foreground is almost at my feet and the brink of the falls is 80 feet above the pool. I am guessing that depth of field softness in a photo is what gives it dimension, rather than this optically flat image in focus everywhere. But, I wanted it in focus everywhere that is how I saw it and the foreground was just as important to me as the falls.

Attached photo of Cloudland Falls, in the White Mountains, NH Sept 2014. I have photographs of the 3 falls on the falling waters trail going up to the Franconia Ridge and Mount Liberty. If I figure this APUG stuff out, I should try to post all three in my gallery, that is currently empty.

Taken 8x10 on HP-5plus developed in Perceptol 1+2, attempting for the best tradeoff of grain and acutance. Lens was 240mm Docter Optics APO-Germinar used at f32.

I think a lot of the sharp look of this image is lost due to the limits of image size to post. I had to resize and then jpg. the original print is really nice to look at both 8x10 and 16x20, in its sharpness and detail. The uploaded image is a drum scan of the negative, not of the print.



>michael

 

[Sirius Glass]

michaelorr welcome to APUG

 

[michaelorr]

Siriusly, thanks! There is great information here, helped me numerous times.

I have now figured out how resize photos and upload, so the three falls that my earlier post is part of are all now posted in my image gallery.