Q3 Lens Distortion

[kiwidad]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, earleygallery said:

The Q has a wideangle lens, so this is a valid point. It's really not the best tool for the OP's task.

Yeah but he shot at a 35 crop so the edge distortion shouldn't be a thing. I have not shot a q3 but it's the sameness in the Q2 according to Leica and I fount it to be predictably perspective challenged purely on the basis of a receding subject (think angle main. subject not shot square on) butI don't ever recalled such distortions.

[earleygallery]

15 hours ago, kiwidad said:

Yeah but he shot at a 35 crop so the edge distortion shouldn't be a thing. I have not shot a q3 but it's the sameness in the Q2 according to Leica and I fount it to be predictably perspective challenged purely on the basis of a receding subject (think angle main. subject not shot square on) butI don't ever recalled such distortions.

It's not just edge distortion (clearly as the OP has an issue with it). It will be more extreme at the edges but it doesn't disappear when you crop to 35.

Distortion won't be an issue more most applications but for what sounds like a technical application as the OP's it is. 5x4 bellows/view cameras were often used by pro photographers for architechture and product photography where distortion needed to be eliminated, before much could be done with PS, and many still do.

I think the APO M Summicron 50 is a lens with minimal distortion, but you need an M body as well.

[Le Chef]

1 hour ago, earleygallery said:

I think the APO M Summicron 50 is a lens with minimal distortion, but you need an M body as well.

You can use an M - L adaptor and shoot with a TL/CL/ SL/Lumix S5…

[kiwidad]

7 hours ago, earleygallery said:

It's not just edge distortion (clearly as the OP has an issue with it). It will be more extreme at the edges but it doesn't disappear when you crop to 35.

Distortion won't be an issue more most applications but for what sounds like a technical application as the OP's it is. 5x4 bellows/view cameras were often used by pro photographers for architechture and product photography where distortion needed to be eliminated, before much could be done with PS, and many still do.

I think the APO M Summicron 50 is a lens with minimal distortion, but you need an M body as well.

From the description I got the impression to straight parallel lines were uncorrectably distorted and such distortion would show up in more than just this technical work and yet I only see clean straight lines!

Edited January 24, 2024 by kiwidad

[jaapv]

The distortion was measured by PCmag. 1.1% barrel distortion, which is minimal and esily corrected.

[Miltz]

For those that said or think 28mm is too wide and that’s why it’s causing distortion, that is not it. I’ve shot similar items with the Nikon 35mm 1.8s and the images look perfect without any additional corrections. It’s quite ridiculous to read people condemn my lens choice without knowing how large the pieces are and my working distance. I decided to use the Q3 this time because of the resolution. I’m using Adobe camera raw which has the profile corrections built in, and cropping in to 35mm. Trying to apply any additional correction looks worse as a mustache wave appears. I haven’t tried any other software but I’m not going to buy or learn new software just for the Leica Q3. Besides Leica’s built in profile correction should be excellent. I might have to rent a Nikon Z7II and use my Nikon 35mm 1.8s which is optically amazing. Thankfully the awful distortion of the Q3 hasn’t affected any of my other images I’ve taken. I might consider a SL3 in the future. 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anyhow, in your case you shouldn’t be seeing significant distortion. Complaining on a forum without illustrating the problem is not very productive. The only thing it does is trigger “mine doesn’t” posts.
At least consult a Leica Store to help you pinpoint the problem. The complication may be the optical bit of the lens (unlikely) the digital part of the lens or a mismatch between the camera and postprocessing software, which I suspect is the case. 
I cannot imagine that systemic mustache distortion has gone unnoticed since the introduction of the original Q. The only mentions I could find was one on DPR that complained about pincushion distortion and a few reviews that mentioned negligible barrel distortion. 

[earleygallery]

15 hours ago, Miltz said:

It’s quite ridiculous to read people condemn my lens choice without knowing how large the pieces are and my working distance.

The Q uses a wide angle (some say 24mm in reality) lens that in its 'raw' state shows massive distortion, it's corrected in camera as part of the overall design but as with most wide angle lenses some distortion will remain.

You can't share images, fair enough, but without seeing what you're talking about it seems unfair that you are blaming the tool here. As the saying goes..........

[changomeister]

I noticed in Darktable didn't apply lens correction automatically. Here is what it looks like with and without lens correction from a RAW.

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!

[jaapv]

Well, given that the digital element is an integral part of the Q lens design that has been part of the optical computation from the beginning ( as is the case with quite a few modern lenses of all brands), we can only conclude that Darktable does not support the Q. 
Nothing new here, it has been discussed ad nauseam in this forum and elsewhere at the introduction of the first Q camera. 
Actually “corrections” is a bit of a misnomer. Judging a hybrid lens without the digital part is equivalent to judging a purely optical lens after removing one element.

 
Summarizing: There are more convenient raw converters for the Q than Darktable. 

[SrMi]

On 1/24/2024 at 1:33 PM, earleygallery said:

The Q uses a wide angle (some say 24mm in reality) lens that in its 'raw' state shows massive distortion, it's corrected in camera as part of the overall design but as with most wide angle lenses some distortion will remain.

You can't share images, fair enough, but without seeing what you're talking about it seems unfair that you are blaming the tool here. As the saying goes..........

It is 26mm, not 24mm. Interestingly, it delivers the same horizontal FOV as the Fuji GFX 100RF, which has 35mm (28mm in FF).

The distortion is corrected in the post-processor, not in the camera. The camera provides distortion data in the raw file.

[zlatkob]

I want to see this awful distortion / wavy mess. This appears even with the built-in profile applied? I suppose it is possible. But without seeing it, there is no sensible way to comment.

[earleygallery]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

 

The distortion is corrected in the post-processor, not in the camera. The camera provides distortion data in the raw file.

JPEG files are corrected in the camera. Also the file you preview in the finder or on the back screen is obviously corrected by the camera!

Edited May 5 by earleygallery

[SrMi]

8 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

JPEG files are corrected in the camera. Also the file you preview in the finder or on the back screen is obviously corrected by the camera!

Yes, the file preview and what you see in the EVF and LCD are based on the generated JPG.

Raw data is not modified.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, zlatkob said:

I want to see this awful distortion / wavy mess. This appears even with the built-in profile applied? I suppose it is possible. But without seeing it, there is no sensible way to comment.

Of course  There is no sensible way to comment on half a lens.