Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-22-2012, 07:07 PM   #91
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,176
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Here are some reasons why designed for film lenses may not work to their full potential on digital sensors...
This would more adequately read as "Here are some reasons why some designed for film lenses may not work to their full potential on some digital sensors".

The sensors in the Sony NEX-7 and NEX-5 are good examples for sensors that are more (NEX-7) or less (NEX-5) susceptible to this problem. I understand that it just depends on the design of the microlenses.

If you look at the NEX-7 vs NEX-5 discussions, you'll furthermore notice the only older wide-angle lenses cause grief on the NEX-7.

I understand that the incident angles created by "normal"/"standard" or higher focal length lenses are not a challenge for modern sensors.

There is another difference between film and digital sensors which is the depth of the imager. It is conceivable that lenses designed for film had their CAs tweaked in such a way that they matched the order of colour sensitive layers in film. A digital sensor using a Bayer-array would then not benefit from such an optimisation (whereas a Foveon-type sensor could). However, if I remember the respective quantitative analysis correctly, the effect of this potential issue would be noticeable but not be a show stopper.

05-22-2012, 07:58 PM - 2 Likes   #92
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,907
How come Klaus/Photozone always gets lemons from his Pentax lens donors? (are they really Canikon saboteurs instead )


The emphasis on numbers (esp. MTF) on lens review sites has resulted in a new generation of enthusiasts who only want/know sharpness.
The sad effect of this is that this will push lens design towards meeting these numbers regardless of more aesthetic aspects.
If there is any chance to show off other aspects of a lens in a lens review other than the numbers, I'd think a series of shots that would include :

1. Studio setup (45deg light and/or side light); Bkgnd light
2. Small object; near and further focus
3. Larger object (close to a human head and shoulders); Near and further focus
4. Object close to half body portrait; Near and further focus
All at apertures from wide open to probably f8.

Probably too tedious to do.




QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote


Don't forget, Klaus works hard on his reviews, but many Pentax users have much more experience with these lenses than he does. Characteristics like image sharpness near the outside of the frame may matter for some photos, but usually goes unnoticed. At the same time, the characteristics mentioned above will be noticed, even if unconsciously by some viewers (which is usually a good thing). And I dare say that in most situations where edge sharpness is critical one would stop down anyway (such as when using a copy stand or taking most landscape pictures).


.
Well said.
05-22-2012, 08:23 PM   #93
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
That'd be interesting, lenses designed by computers, assembled by robots, and tested and ranked on computers.Or is that already reality?
05-22-2012, 08:30 PM   #94
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,723
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
The emphasis on numbers (esp. MTF) on lens review sites has resulted in a new generation of enthusiasts who only want/know sharpness.
Pixel-peeping may be more to blame.
If anything, the MTF data given in lens review sites
is less detailed than the old-format MTF curves.

05-22-2012, 08:38 PM   #95
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 100
I thought purple fringing was due to sensor blooming, ie, when a "pixel" is oversaturated, some charge spills over into the next "pixel". That can occur anywhere from center to edge of frame.

Chromatic aberration, on the other hand, is definitely something that happens around the edge of the frame. I don't know about the sensor contribution, however, dispersion in glass and plastic most certainly will cause CA from the optic itself. CA can be minimized by optimizing glass selection within the lens design.

ETA: I should have more correctly stated that CA is most emphasized at the edge of the frame, not that it ONLY occurs there.

Last edited by Asha; 05-23-2012 at 05:44 AM.
05-22-2012, 08:53 PM   #96
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
I wonder why digital sensors are not made concave, would get rid of a lot of problems!
05-23-2012, 04:05 AM   #97
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,009
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
How come Klaus/Photozone always gets lemons from his Pentax lens donors? (are they really Canikon saboteurs instead )


The emphasis on numbers (esp. MTF) on lens review sites has resulted in a new generation of enthusiasts who only want/know sharpness.
The sad effect of this is that this will push lens design towards meeting these numbers regardless of more aesthetic aspects.
If there is any chance to show off other aspects of a lens in a lens review other than the numbers, I'd think a series of shots that would include :

1. Studio setup (45deg light and/or side light); Bkgnd light
2. Small object; near and further focus
3. Larger object (close to a human head and shoulders); Near and further focus
4. Object close to half body portrait; Near and further focus
All at apertures from wide open to probably f8.

Probably too tedious to do.
.
Klaus "borrows" lenses from actual users. I know, for instance, that his 60-250 test was taken from a lens owned by Falk Lumo who posts here under the name Falconeye. Clearly these people are happy with their lenses, or they would have returned them/had them repaired. I guess it goes to show that these sort of flaws, even if present, probably don't effect every day shooting that much.

At the same time, the Imatest charts that Klaus uses are pretty standard and should give consistent results for the same sensor. To me, the most useful thing about the tests is seeing where the lens "peaks." So, the FA 31 peaks at f2.8, although it remains strong to f8. With this copy of the FA 43, the center is actually pretty strong throughout, but the borders don't seem to get sharp till f4. Klaus usually does do a walk around with a new lens as well and posts photos from that.
05-23-2012, 07:29 AM   #98
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,723
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
I wonder why digital sensors are not made concave, would get rid of a lot of problems!
Because they're made on standard chips, which are flat.

However, the Kepler Space Observatory sensor
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/Keplerspacecraft-FocalPl...cutout.svg.png
is made up of an array of small flat sensors
arranged in a large-scale concave pattern.

Back in the 1950s,
Kodak "medium format" box cameras with simple meniscus lenses
used to curve the film track to match the Petzval field curvature of the lens,
at least in the horizontal direction.

05-23-2012, 07:37 AM   #99
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
How come Klaus/Photozone always gets lemons from his Pentax lens donors? (are they really Canikon saboteurs instead )


The emphasis on numbers (esp. MTF) on lens review sites has resulted in a new generation of enthusiasts who only want/know sharpness.
The sad effect of this is that this will push lens design towards meeting these numbers regardless of more aesthetic aspects.
If there is any chance to show off other aspects of a lens in a lens review other than the numbers, I'd think a series of shots that would include :

1. Studio setup (45deg light and/or side light); Bkgnd light
2. Small object; near and further focus
3. Larger object (close to a human head and shoulders); Near and further focus
4. Object close to half body portrait; Near and further focus
All at apertures from wide open to probably f8.

Probably too tedious to do.

. . .
As posted earlier, Hirakawa Jun didn't make the MTF target the primary concern although he made it an important one. It may be interesting to find out how he tested lenses of these types.
QuoteOriginally posted by Asha Quote
I thought purple fringing was due to sensor blooming, ie, when a "pixel" is oversaturated, some charge spills over into the next "pixel". That can occur anywhere from center to edge of frame.

Chromatic aberration, on the other hand, is definitely something that happens around the edge of the frame. I don't know about the sensor contribution, however, dispersion in glass and plastic most certainly will cause CA from the optic itself. CA can be minimized by optimizing glass selection within the lens design.

ETA: I should have more correctly stated that CA is most emphasized at the edge of the frame, not that it ONLY occurs there.
Although not as bad, purple fringing can occur on film.

Last edited by Blue; 05-23-2012 at 06:00 PM.
05-23-2012, 07:47 AM   #100
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,218
QuoteOriginally posted by zeitlos Quote
I'm from Germany. I do have a silver version of the FA43.
Klaus already got back to me. Seems like he has already found a lens to redo the test.
Let's see whether the results will be different this time.
Good news.
05-23-2012, 02:31 PM   #101
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,545
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
Because they're made on standard chips, which are flat.

However, the Kepler Space Observatory sensor
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/Keplerspacecraft-FocalPl...cutout.svg.png
is made up of an array of small flat sensors
arranged in a large-scale concave pattern.

Back in the 1950s,
Kodak "medium format" box cameras with simple meniscus lenses
used to curve the film track to match the Petzval field curvature of the lens,
at least in the horizontal direction.
What a great idea!
05-23-2012, 05:42 PM   #102
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Harikawa Jun
Previously in this thread, Kirakawi Jun, then Kirakawa Jun

Poor Mr. Hirakawa Jun, in addition to being laid off, seeing his lens designs criticized by Photozone, must suffer having his name misspelt several times in this thread.
05-23-2012, 06:09 PM   #103
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Previously in this thread, Kirakawi Jun, then Kirakawa Jun

Poor Mr. Hirakawa Jun, in addition to being laid off, seeing his lens designs criticized by Photozone, must suffer having his name misspelt several times in this thread.
Wow. A couple of transposed letters is the best you can do. Actually, I am not sure if it is Mr. or Dr. However, I doubt you knew who he was before this thread. How soon before you start calling people Rip Van Winkle again?

sarcasm

Last edited by Blue; 05-23-2012 at 07:25 PM.
05-23-2012, 06:19 PM   #104
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
I am pretty sure you dont like people misspelling your name, I have already provided the correct spelling earlier in the thread, why do you persist in misspelling the man's name?
05-23-2012, 06:27 PM   #105
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
I am pretty sure you dont like people misspelling your name, I have already provided the correct spelling earlier in the thread, why do you persist in misspelling the man's name?
I said I transposed some letters.


平川6月
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
f/1.9, fa, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Photozone re-reviews FA31mm hcc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 91 05-30-2012 07:58 PM
Photozone Reviews Tamron 70-200 2.8 HOT! HOT! HOT! JHD Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 31 02-03-2011 09:11 AM
K5 and photozone bluekorn Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 02-02-2011 02:15 AM
photozone da35mm limited review is up! architorture Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 28 08-23-2008 07:38 AM
More Photozone reviews! feronovak Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 05-04-2007 05:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:29 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top