• 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 / Nikon 105/1.4 on D850: CDAF, PDAF, focus shift

Nikon 105/1.4 on D850: CDAF, PDAF, focus shift

January 6, 2018 JimK 2 Comments

This is a continuation of a series of posts on the Nikon D850.  The series starts here. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “D850”.

In the previous post, I reported on my progress in developing a software tool to process image sets made of a LensAlign target to produce the sort of results that FocusTune does: focus distance versus AF Adjust setting. I promised that I would next take the tool to places that FocusTune doesn’t go. I’m delivering on that promise now.

I added some code to my Matlab program to analyze a set of images taken at the same AF Adjust setting and different f-stops and plot the location of the focus distance as a function of f-stop rather than AF Adjust setting.

I tried it out on a set of images from the Nikon 105 mm f/1.4 lens on a D850 at 10 feet, ISO 64, focusing once manually at the beginning of the series, and making 10 or 11 images at the whole f-stops from f/1.4 through f/8. Here’s the result for the AdobeRGB green channel:

All image points are plotted, 10 or 11 for each f-stop. Back-focusing is indicated by positive y-axis numbers and front-focusing by negative ones. I focused the first image with CDAF wide open, and got a small amount of front focusing, but I’m not totally confident in the location of the target plane right now, so don’t put much stock in that. The green line is the average for each stop. As you can see, the spread in the data for each stop is quite small, with the possible exception of one point at f/4. This gives me some confidence in the tool that I’ve written.

You can also see quite a bit of focus shift as the lens is stopped down, which I’ve observed using other analysis methods. By f/4, the shift has virtually ceased, according to these measurements.

Now let’s look at all three AdobeRGB channels:

You can see that the red channel is back-focused with respect to the other two channels. This is a consequence of the 105/1.4’s longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA).

When I use the D850’s contrast-detection autofocus (CDAF) on every shot in a similar series, here is what the green channel data looks like:

Note that the vertical scale if much expanded; the CDAF spread over all stops is much lower than the focus-once spread.

Here are all three color planes:

It looks like CDAF is optimizing the green focus at the expense of the red channel. That is exactly what it should do.

If we use phase-detection autofocus (PDAF) for each shot in a similar set, here’s what we get for the green channel:

Note that the average focus shift with f-stop is about the same quantitative as with the focus-once graph at the top of this page. That indicates to me that Nikon is not compensating for the lens’ focus shift in its D850 PDAF firmware.

Note also that the spread for the PDAF data point at each f-stop is greater than with CDAF. Simply put, Nikon’s D850 PDAF is not as consistent as the CDAF method.

Here is the result for all three channels:

 

In this chart, we can see both the LoCA and the focus shift with aperture.

Now that I have what appears to be a good tool for analysing AF system accuracy and consistancy, as well as LoCA and focus shift, I can — and will —  apply it to other lenses.

D850

← 70-200/2.8E at 200mm D850 PDAF tuning Sigma 85/1.4 on D850: CDAF, PDAF, focus shift →

Comments

  1. Arthur says

    January 7, 2018 at 8:45 am

    Jim,

    Have you ever looked at focus shift and the 3 adobe channels for Apo lenses ?

    Would they be tighter ?

    Thanks –

    Reply
    • JimK says

      January 7, 2018 at 8:51 am

      Have you ever looked at focus shift and the 3 adobe channels for Apo lenses?

      I’ve looked at LoCA using raw color planes many times.

      Would they be tighter?

      First, I believe the identifier “apo” has been appropriated by the marketing folks and they use it whenever they darn well please.

      For example, the Leica 90/2 Apo-Summicron M ASPH is an excellent lens, buts it’s got a fair amount of LoCA.

      http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/another-medium-tele-test-summicron-loca/

      The Otus 85 does not:

      http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/another-medium-tele-test-otus-nikon-loca/

      But having low LoCA doesn’t keep the Otus 85 from having considerable focus shift.

      http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/another-medium-tele-test-otus-nikkor-focus-shift/

      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

  • 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
  • Ivo de Man 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.