the perceived sharpness of lenses

Michael R 1974 said:

Don't be so sure, Drew. The latest aspheric gut buckets are really something.

Click to expand...

So's a 100 year old Dagor in the hands of some one who can actually use it.

DREW WILEY said:

But all this talk about the "image" mattering regardless
of the tools is nonsense. People can make music with kazoos, gut buckets, and handsaws, but I don't want to listen to it.

Click to expand...

I understand both these sentences, but not how they go together. Are you suggesting that you'd like jug band music just fine if it were performed on orchestral instruments instead? (The image of Gus Cannon playing the cello has a certain weird appeal, actually.)

At the risk of putting words in your mouth, it seems like what the second sentence suggests is that jug bands are working in an *aesthetic* you don't like, not that they're impaired by inadequate tools.

-NT

Gerald C Koch said:

I take exception with the term perceived sharpness when used with lenses. Lens resolution is an easily measureable and quantifiable property. There is nothing perceived about it. Now the sharpness of a particular print is subjective and the use of "perceived" is proper in this case.

Click to expand...

I think I see where you are coming from, but as resolution is just one part of what constitutes sharpness, and the other parts include various types of contrast, I think the performance of the lens is relevant to the issue of perceived sharpness.