One last thing before I buy FM: In this thread (if I recall well), it's said that Focus Magic works better for low frequency images and that Infocus might be better for high frequencies.
In my particular case in which I mainly want an app to help boost the capture resolution and the contrast of two lesser optics, which program would work better, FM or Infocus?
That's hard to predict, but the results will be very close anyway. Also remember that we're usually pixel peeping here, and it would be hard to see the differences at normal viewing distance. IF requires more work and tweaking because it quickly generates artifacts when too large a radius is used. FM requires very little work and still does a stellar job in most cases.
Capture sharpening usually has to deal mostly with reducing diffraction (mostly at apertures of f/4 or narrower, and predominantly at narrower than f/8), and to a lesser extent with lens aberrations and defocus. IF might be useful if a lot of manual work is done (when using IFs PSF Estimation, but it requires zooming in on detail with plenty of well-focused angles/edges to get a decent estimate and requires redoing it for each image), but for steady shots from tripod or or shots with Image Stabilization, I'd favor FM in 98% of the cases.
Over time, it might be that TopazLabs develop an improved (paid) version of a Sharpening Plugin specifically for its free "Studio" host progam, although their simple Sharpen plugin for Studio (currently at $19.99 or discounted as part of their Pro-Pack) already does a decent job without artifacts.
The Topaz plugins can be tried for a month, FM only allows to process and save 10 images.
FM might need an ADOBE application installed on your computer to install and unlock, so first install the demo and see if that works on your computer configuration. A purchased license number can then be filled in in the dialog with the same installed plugin.
Cheers,
Bart
