• 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 / Sigma 105/2.8 macro LoCA on D850

Sigma 105/2.8 macro LoCA on D850

November 28, 2017 JimK 5 Comments

This is the 27th post in a series of Nikon D850 tests. The series starts here.

In the preceding post, I looked at the on-axis sharpness and longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) of the Sigma 135 mm f/1.8 ART lens on the Nikon D850. Now I’ll do the same test with the Sigma 105 mm f/2.8 F-mount macro lens. 

The target is a backlit razor blade:

The test protocol:

  • ISO 64
  • Focus shift, silent shutter option
  • 40 steps 
  • Minimum step size (1)
  • Target distance, 1.5 meters
  • Aperture exposure mode
  • Wescott LED panels set to 5500 K.
  • Gitzo legs
  • Arca Swiss C1 head
  • Vinyl tile flooring over 6 inches of concrete on grade
  • Fast Raw Viewer to discard the really out of focus images
  • dcraw in document mode to get raw planes
  • MTF Mapper to compute MTF50
  • Matlab to automate the above
  • Excel to graphs the results

Here are the results wide open:

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. There are 7 more exposures plotted. There is no way to know the focused distance for these exposures. I used the minimum step size for the Focus Shift Shooting feature, which is too large to reliable catch the actual peaks, but it’s not that bad.  Sharpness is good, but not off-the-charts. LoCA as shown by the difference in step number between the peak sharpness on each raw channel, is moderate.

Green channel sharpness at f/4 is impressive. Now there’s only a one-step difference among the three raw channel peaks. That’s not because the absolute distances between the peaks have changed significantly, but because the D850 in FSS mode takes bigger steps as you stop the lens down.

Another good result.

 

 

Now diffraction is dragging everything down to its level. The DOF is enough to cover up the LoCA.

 

Nothing wrong with that lens, at least so far.

 

 

D850

← Sigma 135/1.8 LoCA on D850 Sigma 85/1.4 LoCA on D850 →

Comments

  1. AndrewZ says

    November 30, 2017 at 3:31 am

    Nikon just needs to updated the focus step to the smallest possible distance for all apertures and it would be a simple firmware fix. I expect to see it implemented sometime next decade though. I’m surprised more manufactures built in this feature as magic lantern has had this feature for years and it seems pretty popular.

    Reply
  2. AZSteve says

    December 2, 2017 at 11:47 am

    The last two charts are from the 135mm test, not the 105mm. No need to “publish” this comment, but I’m curious about the relatively elderly 105 stopped down.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      December 2, 2017 at 11:57 am

      Titles are wrong. Graphs are right. Sorry. I may get around to replacing these with the curve-fitted instead of the spline-fitted graphs, and I’ll be sure to get the titles right.

      Reply
      • AZSteve says

        December 3, 2017 at 5:39 am

        The curves are exactly the same in the two graphics on the 105 and 135 pages, n’est-ce pas? For these apertures there don’t seem to be two separate sets of data for the two lenses.

        Reply
        • JimK says

          December 3, 2017 at 7:21 am

          My bad. Fixed now. Thanks for your patience.

          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.