Insights How to Evaluate a Camera Lens for Performance

AI Thread Summary
Recent advancements in digital imaging technology have made it possible to conduct performance testing on cameras using LCD displays, eliminating the need for expensive equipment. Unlike CRT displays, LCDs do not flicker when photographed, allowing for accurate characterization of camera performance. Evaluating lens performance is crucial because lenses do not maintain consistent quality across all f-stop settings. It is commonly advised to use lenses at least one stop down from their maximum aperture to minimize aberrations and achieve optimal sharpness. Discussions on image comparisons highlight that while differences may be subtle, they can be discerned by trained observers.
Andy Resnick
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
7,688
Reaction score
3,773
I’ve done plenty of imaging performance testing on a variety of systems, from millimeter wave to UV. Until very recently, such testing required expensive and specialized equipment. Now, with digital imaging (at least in the visible), you can perform the same type of characterization on your camera for free.
All you need is an LCD.
LCDs work differently from old CRT displays- they are not raster-scanned, for example. So, you can take photos of the display without fear of flicker (which happens if the shutter speed is not a multiple or fraction of 1/30s).
Why evaluate lens performance? There are at least two reasons.
First, lenses do not deliver constant performance over the full range of f-stop. Trained photographers have a saying “Always use the lens stopped down at least 1 stop from maximum”. The reasoning behind this bit of lore is that almost all aberrations get worse with a larger aperture (smaller f-stop). Maximum sharpness will be obtained for a limited range of...

Continue reading...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes BillTre, Tom.G and Greg Bernhardt
Computer science news on Phys.org
Nice job, Andy. Though I admit it is a bit difficult to tell the difference between the pictures to my untrained eye. They look almost identical for the most part.
 
Drakkith said:
Nice job, Andy. Though I admit it is a bit difficult to tell the difference between the pictures to my untrained eye. They look almost identical for the most part.

Thanks!

Which images? The 15/3.5 images are clearly different, the others less so.
 
This week, I saw a documentary done by the French called Les sacrifiés de l'IA, which was presented by a Canadian show Enquête. If you understand French I recommend it. Very eye-opening. I found a similar documentary in English called The Human Cost of AI: Data workers in the Global South. There is also an interview with Milagros Miceli (appearing in both documentaries) on Youtube: I also found a powerpoint presentation by the economist Uma Rani (appearing in the French documentary), AI...
Back
Top