New SL with 24-90... image quality

[Robert E]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

And from the same position, one taken with my Sony Ar72 w/55mm f1.8, at 100% crop of same area, under same conditions, no sharpening.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Aquarius2014]

Sony_55mm.jpgAnd from the same position, one taken with my Sony Ar72 w/55mm f1.8, at 100% crop of same area, under same conditions, no sharpening

Sony's "Ar72" is currently the best camera out there. You should sell the SL and keep the Sony

[meerec]

Sony's "Ar72" is currently the best camera out there. You should sell the SL and keep the Sony

Not sure if you meant to be funny. If so maybe you should be posting at a Sony forum. LOL

[Aquarius2014]

Not sure if you meant to be funny. If so maybe you should be posting at a Sony forum. LOL

No, I was totally serious and provided some links to help Robert but he keeps insisting that the SL Images look soft like 100% DNG crops that haven't been processed. And finally he shows us an image taken with the "Ar72" to prove his point. And we have no idea whether they are OOC JPEGS or not. By the way, it's not up to you to tell people where to post.

[meerec]

No, I was totally serious and provided some links to help Robert but he keeps insisting that the SL Images look soft like 100% DNG crops that haven't been processed. And finally he shows us an image taken with the "Ar72" to prove his point. And we have no idea whether they are OOC JPEGS or not. By the way, it's not up to you to tell people where to post.

Yep I shut up, not having followed the thread, it was not that obvious taken your post out of the context.

But stop reprimanding me. I at least showed some humour in my post.

:-(

[Aquarius2014]

Yep I shut up, not having followed the thread, it was not that obvious taken your post out of the context.

But stop reprimanding me. I at least showed some humour in my post.

:-(

Sorry, got it.

[Robert E]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OK, just to clarify things one more time, the photos I have posted are NOT .dng converted to .jpg. They are out of camera (OOC) .jpgs, with NO LR processing.

Most of my work is done with .jpgs and I rarely use the .dng files, at least for now. So any further analysis should be with the this in mind: .jpg to .jpg, unsharpened, unprocessed in LR. Many thanks for all your help. Maybe someone else out there can comment on how sharp their .jpgs are WITHOUT processing in LR for sharpness. Or am I missing something here?

[LD_50]

Are your shots:

 

1- Manually focused?

2- Focused with magnification to ensure the right area is in focus?

3- Shot with high enough shutter speed and sturdy enough support to eliminate camera shake?

4- Shot with OIS turned off?

5- Shot in DNG?

6- Shot at each available aperture, with focus redone with each change?

 

I would start with a yes to all of these questions. Review your shots and if you are still not getting sharp results, you may have a lens issue.

[Robert E]

Answers are:

1. no, used AF

2. no, used AF with the 24-90 zoom, reason for buying it was to use AF.

3. yes, hand held

4. no, as now rest was used, hand held, but seated position

5. no & yes, camera set to record both, but these are .jpg straight from camera

6. no, use f5.6 90% of the time

 

Thanks for your input. 

[LD_50]

Answers are:

1. no, used AF

2. no, used AF with the 24-90 zoom, reason for buying it was to use AF.

3. yes, hand held

4. no, as now rest was used, hand held, but seated position

5. no & yes, camera set to record both, but these are .jpg straight from camera

6. no, use f5.6 90% of the time

 

Thanks for your input.

 

1- This alone may be the reason for soft results, as you may have missed focus. I would test as described.

 

2- You can check AF results with magnification.

 

I would test as I described to determine if the lens is an issue. I suspect focus was missed.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Robert,

 

I understand that you need to rely on the AF. However a manual focus test with a tripod, IS off and magnification will eliminate or confirm it's optics, not the AF. If the optics are good then we can look at other issues like AF techniques etc.

 

Also. The 24-90 is very good. The equal of the Canon or Nikon versions. However at mid apertures it won't reach what the 55mm 1.8 can do. Especially on the A7R2. Then again neither will the new Sony G-Master, also a good lens. You should be able to get results that are competitive with the Canikony zooms for sure.

 

Gordon

[Robert E]

OK, guys, those are all good suggestions, I will try them and get back with another post. Thanks for the input. 

[IkarusJohn]

Hi Robert,

 

Can I also suggest that you try the test for focus shift?

 

Set your camera on a tripod at 45 degrees to the floor, lay out your tape measure (or one of the focus shift charts), and focus on a number in the middle.  So, say for example, you focus on the 5cm mark with care, we can see if the plane of best focus is in front or behind that point.  It shouldn't matter what settings you use, AF/MF, provided you are absolutely sure that you have focused on your chosen spot, then we can see if you're getting front or back focus.

 

If the plane of best focus is just plain soft, then that will also be obvious.

 

Cheers

John

[Jeff S]

Hi Robert,

 

Can I also suggest that you try the test for focus shift?

 

Set your camera on a tripod at 45 degrees to the floor, lay out your tape measure (or one of the focus shift charts), and focus on a number in the middle.  So, say for example, you focus on the 5cm mark with care, we can see if the plane of best focus is in front or behind that point.  It shouldn't matter what settings you use, AF/MF, provided you are absolutely sure that you have focused on your chosen spot, then we can see if you're getting front or back focus.

 

If the plane of best focus is just plain soft, then that will also be obvious.

 

Cheers

John

 

I'm sure you didn't mean to say focus shift at the outset; that would require stopping the lens down.  Your test is of course for front/back focus, as you note at end.  Always good to test for both to avoid confusion on results.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

I'm sure you didn't mean to say focus shift at the outset; that would require stopping the lens down.  Your test is of course for front/back focus, as you note at end.  Always good to test for both to avoid confusion on results.

 

Jeff

Absolutely, I did. I was referring to the test for focus shift - to use your favourite phrase, use the search function for testing for focus shift. Tha test will work just as well in this situation, as the OP needs to know where the plane of best focus is, and why (if) he's not achieving best focus.

 

Taking pictures of gates won't do it as accurately as setting up his camera on a tripod and focussing at an angle onto a ruler. He's not testing for focus shift - he's just using the same test to be sure where the plane of best focus is.

 

Too subtle?

[JeffWright]

OK, just to clarify things one more time, the photos I have posted are NOT .dng converted to .jpg. They are out of camera (OOC) .jpgs, with NO LR processing.

Most of my work is done with .jpgs and I rarely use the .dng files, at least for now. So any further analysis should be with the this in mind: .jpg to .jpg, unsharpened, unprocessed in LR. Many thanks for all your help. Maybe someone else out there can comment on how sharp their .jpgs are WITHOUT processing in LR for sharpness. Or am I missing something here?

 

 

The problem with this approach is that different camera manufacturers (and different cameras from the same manufacturers) use differing levels of sharpening in their in-camera jpeg conversions (and this often even changes with camera software revisions), so using this as the basis for comparisons is somewhat fallacy prone. 

 

I personally can't tell you a thing about in-camera jpeg sharpness on a single camera I have ever owned, be it Canon, Nikon, Leica or PhaseOne back. I just use jpgs as 'placeholders' for image preview. Although in-camera jpeg conversions have gotten better over time, the RAW files still just allow so much more flexibility it makes little sense (for most) to use jpegs as the basis for your workflow. If you haven't seriously considered this, or aren't willing to modify your workflow, it may not be worth it to you to own the SL system.

 

P.S., what you call "out of camera" or 'OOC' jpegs are actually properly considered 'in-camera' jpegs.

[Jeff S]

Absolutely, I did. I was referring to the test for focus shift - to use your favourite phrase, use the search function for testing for focus shift. Tha test will work just as well in this situation, as the OP needs to know where the plane of best focus is, and why (if) he's not achieving best focus.

 

Taking pictures of gates won't do it as accurately as setting up his camera on a tripod and focussing at an angle onto a ruler. He's not testing for focus shift - he's just using the same test to be sure where the plane of best focus is.

 

Too subtle?

 

I've done the test, correctly....no search needed (there are kits, e.g., LensAlign, to avoid all-too-common errors).  [bTW, I most often provide helpful links for those who ask questions, and then suggest that they can find additional info searching for a certain subject]. 

 

Again the confusion is that you proceed to describe only the set-up, not the focus shift test itself, which of course would require stopping the lens down from wide open.  (Zoom lenses often require testing at different focal lengths).  

 

I guess you meant that he should do a set-up AS IF he were going to test for focus shift, but not really conduct the whole test.  If so, I think that's not sufficient, as he should also really conduct the test.  https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/11/how-to-test-a-lens/

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

There you go.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount