• 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 / The Last Word / Sony 12-24 LoCA & focus shift at 18 & 24 mm

Sony 12-24 LoCA & focus shift at 18 & 24 mm

July 11, 2017 JimK Leave a Comment

This is part 9 of a test of the Sony 12-24 mm f/4 FE lens. The test starts here.

I tested the Sony 12-24 mm f/4 FE lens for on-axis longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) and focus shift. I used my computer controlled focusing rail and a low-contrast inkjet-printed slanted edge target.

A quick review of the test protocol:

  • Sony a7RII
  • ISO 100
  • Manual exposure
  • Wescott LED panels set to 5500 K.
  • EFCS shutter mode
  • Manual focus, set at one position in the center of the rail for f/4
  • Cognisys computer-driven focusing rail
  • 101 exposures 1.6 mm  apart
  • Target distance at the center of the rial, 0.5 m
  • ARW mosaiced files extracted as TIFFs in dcraw (document mode)
  • TIFFs cropped and raw channels selected in Matlab program
  • MTF50 of cropped TIFFs measured with MTF Mapper
  • Data assembled in Matlab
  • Data plotted in Excel

A LoCA plot at 24 mm and f/4:

The vertical axis is MTF50, measured in cycles per picture height (cy/ph). The horizontal axis is camera position shift in cm. The points on the left side of the graph are with the camera farther away from the subject than the points on the right. 

There is essentially zero LoCA: the peaks are at the same distance for all three channels. However, the unnatural (if you’re new to this presentation of LoCA, trust me; it is unusual) flatness of the top of the curve indicates that lens aberrations are limiting sharpness considerably at f/4 and this subject distance. 

At the other three whole stops from f/4 to f/11:

 

 

 

The LoCA, or rather the lack of it, is impressive. There is quite a lot of focus shift, however. Plotting all the green channel results on  one graph will give us an idea of how much:

 

You can see that there is so much focus shift that we may have missed the f/11 peak because we ran out of rail travel. Focus shifts further away as you stop down. You can also see that, at this distance and at 24 mm, you probably don’t want to use f/4.

Let’s look at the results at 18 mm:

That’s what the f/4 peaks should look like.

f/5.6

 

f/8

 

f/11

 

And all the green channels on one plot:

About the same amount of focus shift. At this focal length and subject distance, the lens is sharpest wide open, although there is little penalty in stopping down to f/8.

We have enough data in the charts above to say something about the lens’ parfocality — its ability to hold focus position as the focal length is changed. There is about 1 1 cm shift at f/4 away from the camera as the lens is zoomed from 24 mm to 18 mm.

This is pretty good performance, but the lens should be focused at the taking aperture at least as far as f/8 for best results.

It is an open question how much of the above applies to the lens when the subject distance is much greater. I have no way of testing that.

The Last Word

← Fuji 110/2, 120/4, Zeiss 135/2 OOF PSFs Lightroom performance improvements? →

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

  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • 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

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.