the model is hot!

however the photography isn't all that exciting.

lighting is flat, catch light...messy, unprocessed, etc.

image is in focus but I don't think its any sharper than other images I've seen.

image looks like a practice shot than a photoshoot.

 

Hi, I stopped browsing here since I got my "new" track toy.

I didn't shoot this, just came across this shot from work's server (I work at a printing company). This shot is by far the sharpest photo (digital or film, but I think it's digital) I have ever seen. And it has to be MF with a relatively weak AA filter, it's hard for DSLR to achieve that kind of sharpness.

 

oooo I see you are tracking a Miata. good for you. I'm waiting until next year to start tracking my M3. getting parts ready for the track in the meanwhile.

image you posted is ridiculously sharp...hurts my eye. lol

 

I have been looking for examples on and off all day, I remember seeing a set of images shot with a 1ds and a prime L lens that looked insanely sharp, similar to the above, but I can't find them again to be able to really compare.

 

It doesn't HAVE to be MF. A 5DMKII or a 1Ds with a nice lens can capture sharp images of that size with good glass and some minor editing.

 

If you find any examples, please post some links (or drop me a PM). I considered a much more major upgrade when I bought the D300, but wasn't convinced that any AA filter would ever allow the kind of detail that draws me so strongly to sheet film.

LOL, since I have no talent as an artist I like my images best when they're so sharp that they surprise me.

What I want is Sinar results on a Kodak budget. j/k

 

[QUOTE=NFRs2000NYC,Feb 9 2009, 08:02 PM]It doesn't HAVE to be MF.

 

Here's the best I can find so far. It is a review of the 135mm lens with sample full size images from a 1ds (not mark II). These are taken with a 11MP sensor so consider that a markII at 23MP (i think that's what it is, too lazy to double check) should be able to resolve some more detail.

Specifically look at the full size of the first shot (headshot) and look at the definition in the eye lashes, I'd say they are close to the wisps of hair. Of course lightning and background-foreground contrast, plus focus and dof all play big rolls when you are getting this critical. The eyes and eye lashes however should be considered in critical focus.

http://www.640pixels.com/articles/canon-13...f2l-review.aspx

 

I agree with Red: catch lights are a mess, but that is the only detail. otherwise it might look like a painting and over processed.

I found the photo while looking at yellowbullet >Trash Or Be Trashed> "NWS...Hot Girl Friday" everyone seems to post NSFW photos

(if you search out the site the photos are NSFW, lots of XXX) and more details of the female anatomy I never knew

my guess is Digital, prime lens, 100iso, f3.5-5.6?
I found a couple hairs they only half retouched out around bg and her head
Her beauty makes up for retouching and lighting errors

 

I beleive that photo posted by the OP and many others of her were part of her layout that was shot for Baby Phat. With that said Im convinced its MF with a digital back.

I have owned a 1DS and I dont feel it was all that sharp no matter what lens i mounted to it.

Im above that body now and I still feel that 35mm just does not meet the MF quality yet. Its damm close but not yet.

I have not yet shot with a 5DMKII so I canot speak for that newest body.