1. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 1 HD acquisition equipment choices & quality: What are the options?

2. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 2 The Reference HDTV Camera 1920 pixels per line 1080 lines per frame 2/3-inch (11mm) imager 3-chip prism color separation tripod/shoulder mount 59.94 images/sec $ tens of thousands Grass Valley, Hitachi, Ikegami, JVC, Panasonic, Sony

3. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 3 The 2009 HDTV Camera Landscape 1920 pixels per line 1080 lines per frame 2/3-inch (11mm) imager 3-chip prism color separation tripod/shoulder mount 59.94 images/sec $ tens of thousands Grass Valley, Hitachi, Ikegami, JVC, Panasonic, Sony 540413 1/6-inch (3mm) 1-chip sensor filter ice-cube size <1 images/sec $120 w/lens & storage 57602540 FF35 (43mm) 4-chip [layered chip] ? >1000 images/sec ~$250,000 bare ARRI, Astro, Camera Corps, Canon, Easylook, FFV, G~, HDAVS, Iconix, i-movix, LMC, Lux, NAC, Panavision, P+S, Red, Skyline, Silicon Imaging, Toshiba, Vision Research, Weisscam, Wige Media Aiptek, DigiLife, DXG, Flip, Fujitac, GE, Insignia, Isonic, Jazz, Kodak, Konaki, Memorex, Mercury, RCA, Samsonic, Samsung, Sanyo, SVP, ViMX, Vivitar

4. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 4 More Variations Panasonic AG-HVX200: Imagers: 960x540 w/½-pixel diag. offset Constraints: 720p – 960 luma, 480 chroma 1080i – 1280 luma, 640 chroma 1080i – 1280 luma, 640 chroma Output: 720p – 1280x720 1080i – 1920x1080 1080i – 1920x1080 filter mosaics 1080, 810 Sony HVR-V1 Genesis & F35: F35: Imager 5760x2160 5760x2160 Per color 1920x2160 1920x2160 Output 1920x1080 1920x1080 CMOS vs. CCD (& full vs. FT vs. IT vs. FIT) CMOS vs. CCD (& full vs. FT vs. IT vs. FIT) Photosensor fill factors Photosensor fill factors Rectangular vs. diamond sensor shapes Rectangular vs. diamond sensor shapes Stripe vs. mosaic color filters (& variations) Stripe vs. mosaic color filters (& variations) Offset imagers or not Offset imagers or not Optical viewfinder mirror or not Optical viewfinder mirror or not Interlace vs. progressive Interlace vs. progressive stacked sensors

5. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 5 Camera or Acquisition System? Lighting: huge effect on final image Lens & Filtering: design, focal length, iris, front & back filters Imager & Camera Optics: more to come Camera Image Processing: many parameters Compression Coding: varies with image, format, & storage Storage: no effect on image except money, time, size, weight, life, labor, and labeling 32 GB currently (>6 x DVD)

6. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 6 Lighting (from www.lowel.com/edu courtesy of Lowel)

7. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 7 Optical & Electronic Processing without & with UltraPol filter (courtesy of Tiffen) Panasonic Varicam black stretch +3, -3 master gamma.35,.75 dynamic level 200, 500 (from Goodman’s Guide, courtesy of Robert Goodman)

8. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 8 Can You Really Fix It In Post? without polarizing filter with polarizing filter (courtesy of Tiffen) mounts & operators count, too unstable image stable image

9. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 9 Interactions look look filtering-processing-lighting- iris-makeup-costume-set filtering-processing-lighting- iris-makeup-costume-set lighting-iris-distance-imager lighting-iris-distance-imager stability stability mount-lens-external stabilizer mount-lens-external stabilizer shooting shooting weight-compression-storage weight-compression-storage sensitivity-lighting sensitivity-lighting autofocus-operator autofocus-operator smallerlighter less power labeling,security

10. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 10 Which Person Looks Angrier? “Angry Man/Neutral Woman,” 1997 copyright Aude Oliva, MIT and Philippe G. Schyns, University of Glasgow

11. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 11 Introducing Contrast contrast resolution Do you see a curve along the bottom?

12. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 12 Contrast-Sensitivity Function contrast resolution curve varies with retinal angle and observer

13. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 13 Modulation Transfer Function contrast resolution “sharpness” is proportional to the square* of the area under the curve curve shape varies due to such factors as filtering, diffraction, imager resolution, etc. * ARRI says the area, not the square

14. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 14 Combining Vision & Technology contrast resolution invisible not reproduced available & visible

15. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 15 Why More Imager Resolution

16. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 16 Why More Imager Resolution If this is 1080 lines, then the contrast ratio at 1080 lines is zero zerocontrast

17. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 17 Why More Imager Resolution If this is 2160 lines, 64%contrast then the contrast at 1080 lines is 64%

18. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 18 Real MTF Curves EOS 10D 3072 x 2048 EOS 20D 3504 x 2336 14% linear increase in sensors (1080 over 480 is 225%) courtesy Bob Atkins www.bobatkins.com used with permission

19. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 19 Real-World Sharpness Change again, just 14% more resolution EOS 10D 3072 x 2048 EOS 20D 3504 x 2336 courtesy Bob Atkins www.bobatkins.com used with permission

20. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 20 HDCAM/DVCPRO HD Compromise contrast resolution loss of lots of resolution but very little sharpness ^ & AVCHD

21. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 21 Cameras & Lenses For Sharpness Does Anything Else Matter?

22. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 22 1920 x 1080

23. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 23 1920 x 1080 960 x 540 captured at 1920 x 1080

24. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 24

25. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 25 Even on the HD cup the word “SHOW” can’t be read clearly (never mind “ WITH JAY L en O”).

26. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 26 Imaging Formats 30 mm 21.4 mm

27. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 27 Imager Size 2/3-inch ARRI D-21, Dalsa, Panavision Genesis, Red One, Sony F35 Canon EOS 5D Mark II Vision Research Phantom 65 1/3 1/2 - 1/4-inch Dynamic Range Dynamic Range Sensitivity Sensitivity Lens Quality Lens Quality Limitable Depth of Field Limitable Depth of Field - 1/5-inch PanasonicHDC-SD1001/6-inch -

28. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 28 Optical Format Factor: The Basics lens image Ø x y x y Ø Ø normal imager widescreen imager imager Ø AR x y P65 59.616:951.2 30.5 FF35 43.3 3:236.0 24.0 S35 31 4:324.9 18.7 ARRI D 30.8 ~4:324.9 18.2 Red One 28.016:924.4 13.7 Genesis 27.516:924.0 13.5 Academy 27.311:822.0 16.0 1-inch 16 4:312.8 9.6 1-inch 1616:913.9 7.8 imager Ø AR x y 2/3-inch 11 4:3 8.86.6 2/3-inch 1116:9 9.65.4 1/2-inch 8 4:3 6.44.8 1/2-inch 816:9 7.04.0 1/3-inch 5.6 4:3 4.53.4 1/3-inch 5.616:9 4.92.7 1/4-inch 4.516:9 3.92.2 1/5-inch 3.616:9 3.11.8 1/6-inch 3.016:9 2.61.5

29. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 29 True or False? Larger-format cameras offer wider angles Larger-format cameras offer wider angles Larger-format cameras are more sensitive Larger-format cameras are more sensitive Larger-format cameras have less depth of field Larger-format cameras have less depth of field Sony HDR-TG1, 3.6 mm ø Panavision Genesis, 38.1 mm ø Sony HXR-MC1 3.6 mm ø Panasonic HDC-DS100 3 mm ø

30. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 30 True or False? Larger-format cameras offer wider angles Larger-format cameras offer wider angles Larger-format cameras are more sensitive Larger-format cameras are more sensitive Larger-format cameras have less depth of field Larger-format cameras have less depth of field Answer: Yes (i.e., the statements are both false and true)

31. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 31 The Format Factor Divide equivalent factors of one format by another’s. e.g., 2/3-inch imager 11-mm diagonal divided by 1/3-inch imager 5.6-mm diagonal yields a format factor of ~2. Applies to many imaging characteristics Applies to many imaging characteristics acceptance angle, sensitivity, dynamic range, depth of field, diffraction, lens MTF acceptance angle, sensitivity, dynamic range, depth of field, diffraction, lens MTF

32. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 32 Acceptance Angle Based on focal length and imager size: Based on focal length and imager size: 13.5 mm lens, 16:9 aspect ratio, horizontal: 13.5 mm lens, 16:9 aspect ratio, horizontal: 55° – 1-inch (wide angle) – 10.3’ shot at 10’ 55° – 1-inch (wide angle) – 10.3’ shot at 10’ 39° – 2/3-inch (normal) – 7.1’ shot at 10’ 39° – 2/3-inch (normal) – 7.1’ shot at 10’ 29° – 1/2-inch (tighter) – 5.2’ shot at 10’ 29° – 1/2-inch (tighter) – 5.2’ shot at 10’ 20° – 1/3-inch (tighter still) – 3.6’ shot at 10’ 20° – 1/3-inch (tighter still) – 3.6’ shot at 10’ 17° – 1/4-inch (very tight) – 2.9’ shot at 10’ 17° – 1/4-inch (very tight) – 2.9’ shot at 10’ 13° – 1/5-inch (close-up) – 2.3’ shot at 10’ 13° – 1/5-inch (close-up) – 2.3’ shot at 10’ 11° – 1/6-inch (tight close-up) – 1.9’ shot at 10’ 11° – 1/6-inch (tight close-up) – 1.9’ shot at 10’ O I D F O I – = – D F

33. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 33 O I DF O I – = – D F The Format Factor: divide dimensions of formats (e.g., 11 mm 2/3” video divided by 5.6 mm 1/3” ≈ 2) Acceptance Angle (shot size): Acceptance Angle (shot size): 20 mm lens in 2/3” same as 10 mm in 1/3” 20 mm lens in 2/3” same as 10 mm in 1/3” But 4.5 mm in 2/3” same as 2.3 mm in 1/3”, But 4.5 mm in 2/3” same as 2.3 mm in 1/3”, 1.8 mm in 1/4”, 1.5 mm in 1/5”, 1.2 mm in 1/6”

34. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 34 Why Haven’t We Noticed? Traditionally adjusted for imager format: Traditionally adjusted for imager format: 2/3-inch lens – 18 x 7.6 2/3-inch lens – 18 x 7.6 1/2-inch lens – 18 x 5.5 1/2-inch lens – 18 x 5.5 Not in interchangeable-lens small-format HD: Not in interchangeable-lens small-format HD: “1/3-inch” lens – 16 x 5.5 (1/3-inch should be 3.8) “1/3-inch” lens – 16 x 5.5 (1/3-inch should be 3.8) 2/3-inch equivalent 11 mm (45% less wide) 2/3-inch equivalent 11 mm (45% less wide) Built-in lenses better adjusted Built-in lenses better adjusted Panasonic AG-HVX200 4.2 mm (2/3-inch equivalent 8.4 mm) Panasonic AG-HVX200 4.2 mm (2/3-inch equivalent 8.4 mm) Sony HDR-FX1, HVR-Z1U 4.5 mm (2/3-inch 9 mm) Sony HDR-FX1, HVR-Z1U 4.5 mm (2/3-inch 9 mm) Sony HDR-TG1 3.2 mm, HXR-MC1 (2/3-inch 9.8 mm) Sony HDR-TG1 3.2 mm, HXR-MC1 (2/3-inch 9.8 mm) Panasonic HDC-HS100 2.95 mm (2/3-inch 9mm) Panasonic HDC-HS100 2.95 mm (2/3-inch 9mm) Good for tight, bad for hand-held Good for tight, bad for hand-held essentially same angle

35. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 35 Digital Determination & $700 8.5-75 mm free 15° 2/3-inch 16:9 focal lengths  1.1 m - pinkie nail ~0.5°  550 mm - pinkie ~1°  270 - thumb width ~2°  184 mm - thumb top ~3°  110 mm - salute ~5°  73 mm - thumb ~7.5°  55 mm - fist ~10°  36 mm - Director ~15°  27 mm - spread ~20°  23 mm - dart 22.5°  11.5 mm - half 45°  7.2 mm - dart+half 67.5°  5 mm - corner 90° Director Optical Origami FunctionalFingers

36. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 36 The Format Factor: divide dimensions of formats (e.g., 11 mm 2/3” video divided by 5.6 mm 1/3” ≈ 2) Sensitivity (exclusive of microlens issues) : Sensitivity (exclusive of microlens issues) : f/20 in 2/3” same as f/10 in 1/3” f/20 in 2/3” same as f/10 in 1/3” But f/2 in 2/3” same as f/1.0 in 1/3”, But f/2 in 2/3” same as f/1.0 in 1/3”, f/0.8 in 1/4-inch, f/0.7 in 1/5”, and f/0.5 in 1/6” Full output Quarter output microlenses work best at high f-stops

37. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 37 Why Haven’t We Noticed? “The HVR-Z1U actually has better low light sensitivity than many of the older HD cameras” – Andy Sommer, director Advances in technology Advances in technology Microlenses best at narrower apertures Microlenses best at narrower apertures Insufficient information on sensitivity Insufficient information on sensitivity Full characterization: Full characterization: T-stop, illuminant, illumination, reflectance, SNR T-stop, illuminant, illumination, reflectance, SNR What does “minimum illumination” mean? What does “minimum illumination” mean? After a certain point, does it matter? After a certain point, does it matter?

38. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 38 Photosite-Based Dynamic Range Based on individual Based on individual sensor (not imager) size: Range of 1/3-inch sensor (“pixel”) pitches: Range of 1/3-inch sensor (“pixel”) pitches: 2/3-inch comparison: 2/3-inch comparison: full range 1/4 range JVC 1280 x 720 A,C 1920x1080 2/3-inch Canon1 1440x1080 Z1,FX1 960 x 1080 Panasonic960x540 2/3-inch 1920 x 1080 960x540x2 ¼”Sony

39. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 39 Depth of Field Range of distances appearing to be in focus with the lens focused at some particular distance Range of distances appearing to be in focus with the lens focused at some particular distance Complex equations based on f-stop*, focal- length*, shooting distance, and “circle of confusion*” (visually indistinguishable from a dot) Complex equations based on f-stop*, focal- length*, shooting distance, and “circle of confusion*” (visually indistinguishable from a dot) * format-factor-related

40. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 40 The Format Factor: divide dimensions of formats (e.g., 11 mm 2/3” video divided by 5.6 mm 1/3” ≈ 2) Depth of Field (not macro or hyperfocal): Depth of Field (not macro or hyperfocal): Range of distances appearing to be in focus with the lens focused at some particular distance Range of distances appearing to be in focus with the lens focused at some particular distance Complex equations based on f-stop*, focal-length*, shooting distance, and “circle of confusion*” (circle that is visually indistinguishable from a dot) Complex equations based on f-stop*, focal-length*, shooting distance, and “circle of confusion*” (circle that is visually indistinguishable from a dot) * format-factor-related * format-factor-related 20 mm f/20 in 2/3” same as 10 mm f/10 1/3” 20 mm f/20 in 2/3” same as 10 mm f/10 1/3” But 4.5 mm f/2 in 2/3” same as 2.3 mm f/1 1/3”, etc. But 4.5 mm f/2 in 2/3” same as 2.3 mm f/1 1/3”, etc. hyperfocal region depth of field region macro

41. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 41 Why Haven’t We Noticed? We’re engineers, not artists We’re engineers, not artists Is more DOF better? Is more DOF better? © Paul van Walree www.vanwalree.com, used with permission 100 mm f/4100 mm f/22 28 mm f/4 28 mm f/22

42. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 42 What Is Resolution? Traditional video definition (static spatial HxV luma) : Traditional video definition (static spatial HxV luma) : 1920 x 1080, 1280 x 720, etc. 1920 x 1080, 1280 x 720, etc. Optical definition (linear resolution): Optical definition (linear resolution): line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm) line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm) (video resolution ÷ 2) ÷ imager size in mm (video resolution ÷ 2) ÷ imager size in mm Imager Width lp/mm S35 23.8 40 1-inch 13.9 69 2/3-inch 9.6 100 1/2-inch 7.0 138 1/3-inch 5.2 198 1/4-inch 3.9 245 1/5-inch 3.1316 1/6-inch 2.6379 for 1920 pixels per line

43. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 43 20 40 60 80 LP/mm 100 MTF % Relative MTF of HDTV 2/3-Inch, 1/2-Inch, and 1/3-Inch Lens Measured at Picture Center 1/3-Inch 1/2-Inch 2/3-Inch (from Small Format HD Acquisition, Larry Thorpe, Canon, 2005 SMPTE Fall Technical Conference)

44. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 44 20 40 60 80 LP/mm 100 MTF % 1/3-Inch 1/2-Inch 2/3-Inch B&H Photo Prices: Canon XL H1 HDV cc w/20x lens - $ 9K Canon J17Ex7.7BIRS 2/3” lens - $11.5K Canon HJ17Ex7.7B 2/3” HD lens - $19K (not from B&H and much older): Canon HV12x12 1-inch HD lens - $112K Line-pairs per millimeter at maximum imager resolution Large-format: Origin – 60, D20 – 61, Red – 93, Genesis – 120 1080 HD: 1-inch – 69, 2/3-inch – 100, 1/2-inch – 138, 1/3-inch – 198 Lens Performance & Format Factor (11 mm 2/3” video divided by 6 mm 1/3” = 1.83)

45. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 45 Why Haven’t We Noticed? Formerly poor displays (even $40k models) Formerly poor displays (even $40k models) Not an issue for SD Not an issue for SD Small viewing angles Small viewing angles No direct comparisons No direct comparisons Talking heads acceptable Talking heads acceptable Money talks Money talks one of the most-viewed motion-picture sequences: the hand-held, 8-mm Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination built-in lenses are matched to cameras

46. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 46 Understanding Diffraction Airy disk MTF reduced, resolution unaffected www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

47. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 47 Diffraction and MTF Monochromatic diffraction-based MTF Monochromatic diffraction-based MTF MDMTF = 1 - (1.22 x λ x f x lp/mm) MDMTF = 1 - (1.22 x λ x f x lp/mm) Rayleigh Criterion: Airy disks one radius apart Rayleigh Criterion: Airy disks one radius apart almost 100% MTF

48. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 48 Violating the Rayleigh Criterion f/8 f/11f/16f/22 Canon EOS 20D – 6.4 µm sensor pitch originals 232 x 173

49. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 49 1/3-inch f/3.1 1/2-inch f/4.5 2/3-inch f/6.2 1/3-inch f/9.5 1/2-inch f/12.4 2/3-inch f/17

50. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 50 f-number at MTF:0% 50% 75% 2/3” 1088 pels/line --- 22.9 11.5 5.7 2/3” 1088 pels/line --- 22.9 11.5 5.7 2/3” 1920 pels/line --- 13.0 6.5 3.3 2/3” 1920 pels/line --- 13.0 6.5 3.3 1/3” 1920 pels/line --- 6.5 3.3 1.7 1/3” 1920 pels/line --- 6.5 3.3 1.7 2/3” 1920 pels/line --- 20.5 10.2 5.1 2/3” 1920 pels/line --- 20.5 10.2 5.1 1/3” 1920 pels/line --- 10.3 5.1 2.6 1/3” 1920 pels/line --- 10.3 5.1 2.6 worst-case: λ = 630 nm (red) best-case: λ = 400 nm (blue) 100% 92% Practical lp/mm - Diffraction MDMTF = 1 - (1.22 x λ x f x lp/mm)

51. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 51 Why Haven’t We Noticed? Even on a high-end 2/3-inch SD camera, the Rayleigh criterion isn’t violated until almost f/23, and that resolution isn’t sent Even on a high-end 2/3-inch SD camera, the Rayleigh criterion isn’t violated until almost f/23, and that resolution isn’t sent At f/4, the red (worst-case) MTF at the maximum NTSC resolution is 93% At f/4, the red (worst-case) MTF at the maximum NTSC resolution is 93% advanced compression of TK-31

52. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 52 Why Not Maximum Aperture? Flare, ghosts, vignetting, light distribution Flare, ghosts, vignetting, light distribution Lens aberrations Lens aberrations “image height” means distance from center in any direction

53. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 53 Aberrations All lenses have them All lenses have them Monochromatic – Seidel aberrations: Monochromatic – Seidel aberrations: astigmatism, coma, astigmatism, coma, curvature of field (Petzval), geometric distortion, spherical aberration Color – chromatic aberrations Color – chromatic aberrations astigmatism lateral or transverse longitudinal or axial 3-chip correctable, if fixed photos & diagrams © Paul van Walree www.vanwalree.com used with permission

54. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 54 GreenCCDImagePlane FlangeBack48mm BackFocus Lens Mounting Reference Surface Final Lens Surface BTA S-1005-A International2/3-Inch HDTV Standard 5u 10u Camera Reference Focus Plane CameraBeamSplittingBlock courtesy of Larry Thorpe Canon USA not to scale

55. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 55 Simple vs. Complex Lenses Canon HJ17Ex7.7B, 36 elements Focus Variator Compensator Relay

56. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 56 Aberrations & the Format Factor For simple lenses For simple lenses Most aberrations worse at low f, better at low F Most aberrations worse at low f, better at low F spherical longitudinal: ~(F/f) 2 ; lateral: ~(F/f) 3 spherical longitudinal: ~(F/f) 2 ; lateral: ~(F/f) 3 comatic: ~(F/f) 2 comatic: ~(F/f) 2 astigmatic, Petzval, & longitudinal chromatic: F/f astigmatic, Petzval, & longitudinal chromatic: F/f Most also worse on larger imagers, better at low lp/mm Most also worse on larger imagers, better at low lp/mm linear distortion: ~I 3 linear distortion: ~I 3 % distortion, astigmatic, Petzval: ~I 2 % distortion, astigmatic, Petzval: ~I 2 comatic, lateral chromatic: ~I comatic, lateral chromatic: ~I all cancel for same conditions only I cancels for same conditions; I 2 & I 3 better for small-format imagers coma (I) astigmatism (I 2 )

57. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 57 Digital Aberration Correction Lateral chromatic Lateral chromatic Relatively easy to correct Relatively easy to correct NHK UHDTV Astrodesign corrector NHK UHDTV Astrodesign corrector Panasonic most-popular lenses LUT Panasonic most-popular lenses LUT Thomson technology demo at IBC Thomson technology demo at IBC Other aberrations? Other aberrations? Look-up tables theoretically possible Look-up tables theoretically possible need appropriate target + all iris, zoom, focus data need appropriate target + all iris, zoom, focus data AG-HPX500

58. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 58 Lens Resolution versus Aperture Setting (Typical 2/3-Inch HD Portable Lens) 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Aperture in F - Stops ResolutionLP/mm DiffractionLimited Focus-AberrationLimited Desired Resolution = 82 LP/mm 25020015010050 MaximumResolution >2.0 Stops F1.9 courtesy of Larry Thorpe Canon USA

59. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 59 The Sweet Spot Between loss of sharpness due to lens aberrations and loss of sharpness due to diffraction Between loss of sharpness due to lens aberrations and loss of sharpness due to diffraction courtesy of Bob Atkins photography

60. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 60 But Don’t Worry Too Much

61. Mark Schubin, HD World, 2009 October 14 61 We’ve come a long way Questions? 1932 30-line mechanical-TV recording of Betty Bolton