Are MFD’s usually quoted by the manufacturer from the plane of the sensor? How sharp is the lens at MFD? Where can one find charts to show sharpness versus distance?
neuroanatomist said:Yes, MFD is measured from the plane of the sensor. Working distance is measured from the end of the lens.
Sharpness at MFD is dependent on the lens. Some lens designs are better than others, certainly macro lenses are optimized for close sharpness. Some lenses, like the 70-300L, use a floating focus group to improve close focus image quality. There are consequences - for example, in the case of the 70-300L, the MFD is the same as the 70-200/2.8L IS II, and the max magnificaiton is also the same, even though one is at 300mm and the other at 200mm. In other words, the 70-300L has bad focus breathing, and you're getting less than 200mm equivalent focal length at the MFD (that's also true for macro lenses, for example the 100/2.8L is effectively 68mm at 1:1 mag).
I'm not aware of any testing that shows sharpness vs. focus distance. You could use FoCal to do that yourself, though...
ajfotofilmagem said:Yes, the MFD is the distance between the plane of the image sensor and the object being photographed.
Usually "non-macro" lenses have their sharpness tested at medium distances. To scientifically test all lenses in your MFD, you would need to create test cards of various sizes, for ultra wide lenses, up to super telephoto.
The reviews of Chistopher Frost on youtube test the sharpness of lenses also in your MFD.
chrysoberyl said:ajfotofilmagem said:Yes, the MFD is the distance between the plane of the image sensor and the object being photographed.
Usually "non-macro" lenses have their sharpness tested at medium distances. To scientifically test all lenses in your MFD, you would need to create test cards of various sizes, for ultra wide lenses, up to super telephoto.
The reviews of Chistopher Frost on youtube test the sharpness of lenses also in your MFD.
Thanks very much. I am concerned about Sigma 135 Art MFD quality. I know - using a telephoto for close-ups is probably not the wisest technique. But this lens is so sharp that I can't help but compare it to my macro lenses. Thanks again.
johnf3f said:Well about 20% of my photography is done with my Canon 800mm with extension tubes to reduce the MFD and I haven't noticed any loss of quality. If you are concerned about operating your 135mm at it's MFD then just add a 12/13mm extension tube and you won't be operating at MFD! Though you will loose infinity focus. The third party extension tubes are as cheap as chips - just make certain you get the AF capable ones and don't spend more than £15/$19 as there is no point!
chrysoberyl said:ajfotofilmagem said:Yes, the MFD is the distance between the plane of the image sensor and the object being photographed.
Usually "non-macro" lenses have their sharpness tested at medium distances. To scientifically test all lenses in your MFD, you would need to create test cards of various sizes, for ultra wide lenses, up to super telephoto.
The reviews of Chistopher Frost on youtube test the sharpness of lenses also in your MFD.
Thanks very much. I am concerned about Sigma 135 Art MFD quality. I know - using a telephoto for close-ups is probably not the wisest technique. But this lens is so sharp that I can't help but compare it to my macro lenses. Thanks again.
SecureGSM said:the Sigma 135 Art is at it's absolute worst at MFD. The lens is about 20% sharper at infinity.
tiggy@mac.com said:I've been enjoying shooting my Sigma 135 at MFD, but I do find that sometimes a I stray into the <MFD territory, and the resulting blur is my own doing. I have the same issue with the 100-400 II. It does such a good job of getting a semi-macro shot, that I'll often test its MFD, and when that happens some breaths have it in focus, and some breaths heave it just below the MFD. It's hard to judge that level of sharpness on the back screen. I often find it useful to give myself an extra inch and then I find in post that almost everything is spot on.
chrysoberyl said:SecureGSM said:the Sigma 135 Art is at it's absolute worst at MFD. The lens is about 20% sharper at infinity.
Interesting. Is this typically true of tele's? I'll keep this in mind as I run my Sigma 135 vs. Milvus 100 tests. Thanks.
I compared my Canon 100L to my Milvus 100 at MFD and am shocked. The subject is ~20% larger with the Milvus! I expected the opposite. Clearly the Milvus is not as short as the Canon at MFD.
chrysoberyl said:johnf3f said:Well about 20% of my photography is done with my Canon 800mm with extension tubes to reduce the MFD and I haven't noticed any loss of quality. If you are concerned about operating your 135mm at it's MFD then just add a 12/13mm extension tube and you won't be operating at MFD! Though you will loose infinity focus. The third party extension tubes are as cheap as chips - just make certain you get the AF capable ones and don't spend more than £15/$19 as there is no point!
Thanks! I have four ET's and my concern was IQ when using a 20mm with the 135. I was shooting a wildflower in rain and biting insects, and with limited time. In retrospect, I probably was closer than MFD.
What were you shooting with your 800 and extension tubes?