• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / D850 / D850 focus shift shooting with the Sigma 50/1.4 Art

D850 focus shift shooting with the Sigma 50/1.4 Art

November 13, 2017 JimK 1 Comment

This is the 18th post in a series of Nikon D850 tests. The series starts here.

I had a question regarding whether the focus shift shooting feature on the Nikon D850 worked with the Sigma Art lenses, which have the reverse rotation direction of the focusing ring from F-mount (and any Nikon mount, as far as I know) Nikon lenses.

I set up my focusing target and followed this procedure:

  • Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 Art on D850.
  • ISO 64
  • Focus shift, silent shutter option
  • 100 steps 
  • Minimum step size (1)
  • Aperture exposure mode
  • f/1.4 through f/f/5.6 in whole stops
  • Wescott LED panels set to 5500 K.
  • Target distance, 3 meters.

Here’s the target as seen by the camera:

I used Fast Raw Viewer to discard the really out of focus images and put the rest through my processing pipeline: dcraw in document mode, MTF Mapper, Matlab, and Excel.

Here are the results:

The vertical axis is MTF50, measured in cycles per picture height (cy/ph). The shot taken with the lens focused to the closest position is on the left, numbered step 0. There are 20 more exposures plotted. There is no way to know the focused distance for these exposures. You can see that the steps are much larger than the ones I use when I’m measuring LoCA and focus shift with the razor blade and the Cognisys rail. I ended up throwing away 80 images from each set. The flat tops of the red and blue curves are indications that the camera missed the actual MTF50 peaks. This is middling sharp in absolute terms but more than respectable for f/1.4.

The rest of the f-stops:

Now we’re seeing some real sharpness.  I should note that this is an inkjet-printed target, so we’re not going to see off-the-charts numbers.

This time the camera missed the peak of the green curve. I’m guessing that it’s at least a high as the blue one. 

Very nice. The depth of filed is still not enough to cover up the longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA), though.

From the narrowness of the high parts of the curves, it looks like the camera probably came close to catching the peaks at af/5.6.

We can get a sense of whether the camera’s step sizes happened to catch the actual peaks by looking at the data points.

The thing to look for is the symmetry of the two points in each curve on either side of the peak. If they’re about the same MTF50, then we probably caught the peak.

Here’s a case where there is some obvious missing of the peak going on:

 

 

D850

← Do PDAF biases increase variability? D850 focus shift shooting workarounds →

Comments

  1. Andre says

    November 14, 2017 at 11:17 am

    Jim, thanks so far for what has been a fascinating look into the D850’s PDAF behavior (coming from another new D850 owner).

    The Sigma makes me wonder if it’s possible for you to test the idea that different focusing distances could require different tune values, since the Sigma dock lets you tune at 4 different distances. The software also lets you tune at different focal lengths, and I wonder how much variation is there at different focal lengths of a zoom.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.