Perhaps somebody else responds to different observables and that's perfectly valid.ġ) E FL and Milvus (tie), 2) 85 S and PC-E (tie)ġ) E FL, 2) Milvus (close), 3) 85 S, 4) PC-Eġ) 85 S, 2) Milvus (close), 3) E FL, 4) PC-Eįor people who like to add unrelated numbers with arbitrary scaling we have these scores, where lower is better. If anyone wants to cry foul this is the time and place.

Such evidence takes the form of at least a couple of observables: the saturation of the color aliasing, and the diameter of the central gray and mushy portion of the pattern. My interpretations include a term I'm going to call 'sharpness' for the sake of convenience, which is my shorthand for 'evidence of an abundanceof contrast at spatial frequencies above Nyquist'. f/5.6, ISO 64, 1/4th sec Silent Shutter, Delay 3 sec, manually focused in all cases. Unlike my outdoor scene comparison where the placements were center and edge, this time it's center and corner. The lower contrast at the top of the chart is due only to the surface sheen of the lustre print media, caused by the closely positioned lamp. There is a slight curl in the print but the center of the pattern is perpendicular to the line of sight. Siemens Star printed at 360 PPI placed at roughly 50 foot distance. The trouble with that though is that the subject is exceedingly complex, and it included a range of distances that could have spoofed my attempts at locking in at exactly the same focus distance.

The plus side is that there are 3D objects included, just like pretty much any landscape scenario.

I started my response to the question with an outdoor scene that includes landscapey subject details since that was the probable interest of the OP.

Siemens star test chart