Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 9 10 [11]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: People who ask about the D800 have never experienced medium format  (Read 29466 times)
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6916


WWW
« Reply #200 on: November 01, 2012, 12:34:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Moving the hue slider a bit to the right may help, but may have other side effects. See enclosed screen dump.

Diglloyd has found out that some fringing may come from UV or IR. I'll see if I can find that article. So if you have an UV or IR-cut filter laying around you could test.

Best regards
Erik



Logged

Bernd B.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #201 on: November 01, 2012, 05:16:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, Eric! But your tweak turns parts of the hand grey.

Bernd
Logged
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 805


« Reply #202 on: November 01, 2012, 07:09:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Here is one picture taken with a D800 and my Nikkor 85/1,4 AF-S at ISO 100, f/1,4 and 1/2500sec, developed in LR 4, lens profiles and CR removal checked.

Look at that CA above the hand. Is´nt that sick? CA in the center of an image???

Look at the purple fringing on the entire shirt. It renders the grey shirt purple.

It's not sick at all! It's perfectly expectable when you shoot a 60mm diameter lens, containing no low dispersion glass, at the outrageous speed of f1.4.

With my Hasselnlad H3D39 and my first generation HC 150/3,2 at f/3,2 there is still some amount of purple fringing, but much much less.

That's a smaller diameter lens (47mm), and more importantly, a beam convergence which is less than half as steep (f3.2). The pixels are also larger, so the CA is less spatially resolved.

You're not comparing like with like. Try to picture the physics of what's being demanded of the lenses. If you need help doing that, that's cool - just ask us. What isn't cool is ranting about something before you attempt to understand it.

Ray
Logged
Bernd B.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #203 on: November 01, 2012, 08:50:22 AM »
ReplyReply

It's not sick at all! It's perfectly expectable when you shoot a 60mm diameter lens, containing no low dispersion glass, at the outrageous speed of f1.4.

That's a smaller diameter lens (47mm), and more importantly, a beam convergence which is less than half as steep (f3.2). The pixels are also larger, so the CA is less spatially resolved.

You're not comparing like with like. Try to picture the physics of what's being demanded of the lenses. If you need help doing that, that's cool - just ask us. What isn't cool is ranting about something before you attempt to understand it.

Ray

Ray,
the effect of the 150/3,2 MF-lens at f/3,2 is comparable to the 85/1,4 35mm lens at 1,4, so it seems natural to choose this lens trying to keep a "look" when going from MF to 35mm. Both of them are "professional grade". The Hasselblad lens was designed when there was even no digital back available for it (and stands out better today), whilst the Nikon lens was designed at a time, when a 24MP sensor was available for testing. I care less for "beam convergence", I pay money for equipment and expect it to be good. And I would have payed 500,- or 1.000,- EUR more for if it contained a low dispersion element that made it more useable.
Giving me an explanation why a brand new 1.500,- EUR lens does not perform so well is a bit excusing Nikon from their responsibility.
Purple fringing is a quite common effect, the amount of CA in the center is new to me.
Maybe LR has the tools to correct also the latter. Already now or maybe in the future. That was the reason for my post.
Bernd
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 08:56:26 AM by Bernd B. » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6916


WWW
« Reply #204 on: November 01, 2012, 04:10:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Ray,

I have seen at lot of LoCA on large aperture lenses, even such supposedly sporting low dispersion glass. Zeiss Sonnars 85/1.4, 135/1.8 and Macro Planar 100/2 being examples.

I'm pretty firmly in the f/8, tripod, low ISO and MLU camp, so I don't really care, but I can see that those looking for very short DoF do. My way of achieving short DoF is a long lens, but if you work in a small studio it is not really an option.

I see your point, you are right, but that doesn't make the original poster happy ;-(

Interesting stuff from Tim Ashley: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2012/7/the-zeiss-100mm-f2-on-d800



Best regards
Erik


It's not sick at all! It's perfectly expectable when you shoot a 60mm diameter lens, containing no low dispersion glass, at the outrageous speed of f1.4.

That's a smaller diameter lens (47mm), and more importantly, a beam convergence which is less than half as steep (f3.2). The pixels are also larger, so the CA is less spatially resolved.

You're not comparing like with like. Try to picture the physics of what's being demanded of the lenses. If you need help doing that, that's cool - just ask us. What isn't cool is ranting about something before you attempt to understand it.

Ray
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 04:13:30 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6916


WWW
« Reply #205 on: November 01, 2012, 04:35:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I have tested Bernd's image with an evaluation copy of Capture One Pro 7, but I found no immediate salvation. I would say that the image processed by Bernd in LR 4.2 had less issues than what I could achieve in C1 v. 7, but I have little experience with the C1 product.

Best regards
Erik
Logged

heinrichvoelkel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 357


« Reply #206 on: November 01, 2012, 08:05:11 PM »
ReplyReply


Giving me an explanation why a brand new 1.500,- EUR lens does not perform so well is a bit excusing Nikon from their responsibility.

Bernd

Without offense, there lies the difference. What you expect to get for 1500 Euros and what Nikon is willing to design and sell for this price. This is no excuse for Nikon, but your expectations don't match with Nikon's business practice.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7523



WWW
« Reply #207 on: November 01, 2012, 08:27:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I have tested Bernd's image with an evaluation copy of Capture One Pro 7, but I found no immediate salvation. I would say that the image processed by Bernd in LR 4.2 had less issues than what I could achieve in C1 v. 7, but I have little experience with the C1 product.

Did you activate CA correction in the lens tab?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1100


WWW
« Reply #208 on: November 01, 2012, 09:00:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Also check purple fringing in C1. It should  clean right up.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6916


WWW
« Reply #209 on: November 02, 2012, 12:01:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I checked both purple fringing and CA.

I enclose screen dumps of both LR 4.2 and C1 v7.

The LR 4.2 is processed with OP:s settings but I changed the settings for magenta fringing, that almost works but causes a green shift on the hand.

Best regards
Erik


Did you activate CA correction in the lens tab?

Cheers,
Bernard

Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 9 10 [11]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad