But isn’t that lens actually really sharp in real life? And focuses close, too.

The fact that you don’t need something, doesn’t imply that it isn’t important to others. ;-)

I’d like a chart with colour profile from UV to IR, certain data on distortions and aberrations. We all want different things, so it would be nice if the producers provided all of it, in a format that could be directly compared with the data of their competitors. :-)

Yeah… And that’s why it’s cautioned that “[MTF charts] don’t take into account every aspect of a lens.” Which is to say things mildly, I guess. :-)

Edit: Actually, I’ve found the cheap zooms to be quite good for general picture taking, if you don’t need the low F-numbers. Need some fairly weird/nerdy requirements (that is, like those of people hanging around on photo sites) if the kit zooms aren’t good enough for most daily use, I’d say. (Confession: I sometime bring along the kit Nikon 18-50 or 18-140 zooms if I just want to go snapping, say on vacation.) ;-)

I guess it could be if you defined Megapixel and discrete micro contrast. A soft lens can still record as much information (megapixels) but how it records that information matters.
For example a Nikon defocus lens records the same amount of information no matter how you adjust it, but at some settings, the information has a smoother transition of fine detail…

Ah, yes. You’re right. I was looking at the OG 18-55. You have the VRII chart in there.

Megapixel ratings for lenses would be a good proxy for sharpness, wouldn’t it? It’s a measure of how well it resolves detail.

Personally I don’t care for the megapixel rating for any of my lenses. I would rather know how sharp and how much distortion they have….

This is from Nikon’s website. And is the tele illustration at 55mm 5.6. From what I understand is that the lens is able to produce discernable images of black line patterns as described in the article at a rate of almost 100% of the time. Meaning it is high contrast and a very sharp lens. Which maybe it is under perfect lab conditions.

Lucky that we have lens makers that knows how to read them (for we hypothetically could have less performing lens in the real world).

Um, don’t knoe where you got that one. the Nikon website has some definitively more realistic charts, with the wide-end dropping to 0.3 wide open and the tele end dropping to 0.7.

Also, that MTF chart, as far as I understand, only means that the lens is very consistent across the sensor. Not that it’s perfect across it.

It is just another piece of info. Use it or not.
I would not use it as my sole decision maker, but it helps to separate two otherwise similar lenses if that is what you want…

No takers?
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II

Not sure how much I trust manufacturers MTF

I can drive a car real well, but can’t change my oil?