Too sharp

Everyone who buys a lens wants to know that their lens are crazy sharp especially wide open, but how sharp is to sharp. Has anyone ever used a lens and a client found that the images were to sharp?

There's no such thing as too sharp.

If your images are showing sharpness where you don't want it, just selectively blur the image. I can't understand why anyone would want to capture less detail.

IMO there's no such thing as too sharp as you can always soften it up or do what you must in PP if needed...I can see how some people would probably not want to see every line and crater on their face though..

edge100 wrote in post #12882156
There's no such thing as too sharp.

If your images are showing sharpness where you don't want it, just selectively blur the image. I can't understand why anyone would want to capture less detail.

I asked the question because I remember reading someones post were he used a 60 macro and the client or relative, can't remember, said the the image didn't look flattering because it to sharp.

F-Stran wrote in post #12882176
I asked the question because I remember reading someones post were he used a 60 macro and the client or relative, can't remember, said the the image didn't look flattering because it to sharp.

Fine. But that's the fault of the photographer, not the lens.

If your white balance was off, you'd adjust it, right? Similarly, if your image is too sharp, soften it.

But why throw away detail? Surely it's better to capture as much detail as possible at all times, and then be left with the decision of what detail to keep.

I have to say my 100L is insanely sharp. Straight out of the camera shots often look like I have applied significant sharpening. Like everyone else is saying though, that is an easy fix in post.

My Zeiss 100 is SHARP, but im not complaining, im happy!

Parts of a face like eyelashes need to be sharp, but wrinkles need to be softened. That's just what you do when you pp portrait and is not function of the lens. The person whose post you quoted should learn to pp correctly.

Can a person be too handsome or too pretty?

Can a person be too smart?

Can one have too much money?

Can a sprinter run too fast?

Can a Canon L lens be too cheap?

Can a stock you own go up too high?

Obviously there is a need for soft images, soft focus lenses have existed for that very reason. Depending on what your clientel is, there is indeed "too sharp".

The very excuse people use for using FF over crop due to reduced noise leading to reduced post processing time is applicable here. Just because you can capture all detail, but can blur it out later, why not just do what is needed to reduce your post processing time?

It completely depends on what you are shooting, for whom you are shooting, and the amount of time you want to take during post processing.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12882334
Obviously there is a need for soft images, soft focus lenses have existed for that very reason. Depending on what your clientel is, there is indeed "too sharp".

Yes, the image can be too sharp. I believe the OP was concerned about whether lenses could produce images that were too sharp. And the answer to that question is: no, there is no such thing as too sharp. If you need less sharpness, then soften. How long does that take in PS? Create new layer and mask, add blur, paint in the blur where it's needed.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12882334
The very excuse people use for using FF over crop due to reduced noise leading to reduced post processing time is applicable here. Just because you can capture all detail, but can blur it out later, why not just do what is needed to reduce your post processing time?

Because I very seldom want the entire image to be equally sharp. I want eyelashes to be absolutely tack sharp, but I want skin to be smooth. How do I go about doing that in camera?

Wish I had this problem with any of my lenses...

To address the OP, yes, an image can be too sharp. But I don't think a lens can be too sharp.

You can always tone down the image but there's a limit to how sharp a lens can be.

An analogy... just because your car can do 0-60mph in 3.8 seconds doesn't mean you'll burn rubber every time. But it's nice to have it...for when you need it.

edge100 wrote in post #12882366
Yes, the image can be too sharp. I believe the OP was concerned about whether lenses could produce images that were too sharp. And the answer to that question is: no, there is no such thing as too sharp. If you need less sharpness, then soften. How long does that take in PS? Create new layer and mask, add blur, paint in the blur where it's needed.

Because I very seldom want the entire image to be equally sharp. I want eyelashes to be absolutely tack sharp, but I want skin to be smooth. How do I go about doing that in camera?

Again, it depends on the answers to the 3 questions I posted. If you have the time, great, soften what you want. If the recipients don't care if there is a ton of detail, then shoot as sharp as you can go, etc.

There are alot of things you can do during post to create the results you want, however many seem to not want to go down that road.

Much like the discussions of noise, and sensor size, etc completely depends on what you shoot, whom you are shooting it for, and how much post processing you are willing to do. I am repeating this since my conclusion to my post above was conveniently not quoted.

i agree that there is no such thing as "too" sharp, but there is something like "sharp enough"

for me, the tamron 28-75 wide open, the sigma 50-150 wide open at 50mm , canon 70-200 2.8 non-IS at 120~135mm wide open, those are very sharp to me. Personally I won't pay money to get better sharpness becoz it doesn't matter to me anymore.