Improving older lens images

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We all know the older non APO lenses are softer on the edges than wide open.  I have two, 90 2.0 pre APO and 35 Asph and 35 2.0 V4 which is only used on my M8.   I could replace them but the 35 is super expensive and not generally available yet.  The 90 was bought new when it first came out in 198X and it has spent 99.9% of 40 years in storage with smaller lighter lenses taken more often. It is is as new mint condition.  The 50 APO spoiled me so now I have to make a decision.   It was decided to experiment with digital.

Capture One is now my preferred program but PS or perhaps Lightroom could do similar.   Assume a perfect picture that only needs sharpening.  Open a new layer from M10 or M10R and add a circular graduated mask  leaving the center untouched.  With Adobe PS,  turn off sharpening in ACR and work in PS.   Make the graduations round, not elliptical as lenses make round images.   Add some sharpening at 100%.    Move the navigation tool from center to corner  and adjust so they are the same sharpness.  Do your first of normal three step sharpening on a NEW layer,   The edges now show same sharpness across the frame for high/normal contrast objects.  

Keep in mind sharpening will not produce detail that was not captured,  but for most images with high contrast objects, they are reproduced much better.  If you are trying to reproduce paintings or micro chips or copy negatives,  buy a lens made for the purpose like 100 2.8 APO R lens where you need not do all this.  If you do a lot of wide open shooting,  buy the best lenses.  For now I will save the money.

 

 

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[250swb]

I've not really needed to do it with Leica lenses but I'm having some fun using the super resolution mode in ACR to improve some old digital P&S shots. Obviously this is more about the older sensor than the lens, and it's to double the image size and allow for bigger prints, but increasing the resolution then reducing it back down again to the original size certainly makes a difference. 

[Stuart Richardson]

If sharpness is a concern but you do not have the budget or desire to purchase the newest extremely expensive Leica lenses, you should have a look at Voigtlander's high end offerings, like the 35mm APO Lanthar and 50mm APO Lanthar. They will be bring modern edge to edge sharpness to M mount for a much lower price.

While I think your masking situation can probably help in certain instances, I think I would be very hesitant to recommend that kind of fix. In my work as a printer, I have noticed that one of the most difficult things to correct is a sharpness gradient. The reason being is that it is not really a sharpness gradient, but a contrast gradient. You cannot put detail back, as you note, so if you are making a print that is medium to large, you will see something weird going on in the edges. You will basically note the macro detail getting more contrasty, but you gradually lose the detail. I think in cases where the lens is unsharp, it is better not to fight it...not every photo or edge of every photo has to be sharp. Sometimes it just is what it is. If it is pretty important, then I would say it might be worth investigating a better suited lens.

Regarding super resolution, like any interpolation, it only really works well if the sharpness of the detail is very high. So it is easy to make a small sharp photo bigger and pretty sharp, but it is not really going to do anything more than increase the size of a small, unsharp photo. Having a lens that is tack sharp on the sensor you are using is often more important for sharpness in a print than the sensor being high megapixels (which certainly can provide better sharpness at times, as well as better tonality, proportionally lower noise etc).

[250swb]

7 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

 but it is not really going to do anything more than increase the size of a small, unsharp photo. 

No kidding, wow?

[Stuart Richardson]

I am sorry for the awkward wording. What I mean is that a small, sharp file can look very good and convincing when using algorithmic interpolation like Adobe Super Resolution. But if the 100% detail on the small file is not sharp, then it will still look very soft when enlarged. Unless the difference in resolution is quite large, then it can be the case that a good, sharp low resolution file with interpolation can look better than a high resolution file with a less than ideal lens.

I can't read intonation into your post, but if it was intended to be sarcastic, then I am sorry. This can be very obvious to some people, but you would be very surprised at how many clients bring me photos they took with intagram (at a tiny pixel size) and ask to blow them up to the size of a poster...or the number of consumer drone photos they want printed at 100x150cm. The general public (even photographers and artists) don't always have a good idea of how much resolution is required, nor how much it varies depending on subject matter, camera/lens type and so on.

[UliWer]

I don't think there is a reason to "improve" older lens images. If we only look at the time when lenses for the Leica were available, i.e. for almost 100 years now, the results didn't really need improvements, if they were good, and improvements couldn't save them, if they were not good. 

Yes, even standard Lightroom does offer tools for increased resolution which work much better than I thought before I tried them. But do I need them? No. 

[Tom R]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This might not be in the spirit of the original post ....

"Improvement" depends upon context. Why am I making this particular image (or what is the underlying concept for this project, etc.) ? If sharpness, resolution, or some analog/digital artifacts are critical to the message or intended experience, then I might consider changing the format, e.g, from 135 to medium or large format, as opposed to attempting to achieve similar results at a great cost with a narrow band of potential application. 

Offhand, I cannot think of many photographs that depended upon apo chromatic accuracy, etc., outside of some technical application.

At the end of the day, I would not spend lots of cash trying to achieve an effect that didn't extend to more areas of my particular photographic interests .... Of course, others will see it differently.