• 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 85/1.4 LoCA on D850

Sigma 85/1.4 LoCA on D850

November 28, 2017 JimK 2 Comments

This is the 28th post in a series of Nikon D850 tests. The series starts here.

In the preceding two posts, I looked at the on-axis sharpness and longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) of the Sigma 135 mm f/1.8 ART and 105 mm f/2.8 macro lenses on the Nikon D850. Now I’ll do the same test with the Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 ART lens. 

The target is a backlit razor blade:

The test protocol:

  • ISO 64
  • Focus shift, silent shutter option
  • 40 steps 
  • Target distance, 1.5 meters
  • Minimum step size (1)
  • 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 11 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 reliably catch the actual peaks, but it’s not that bad.

For comparison, here are the results with the same target and a somewhat different protocol (it’s a manual focus lens) for the Otus 85 mm f/1.4, also wide open;

The Otus has far less longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA), as indicated by the tight grouping of the peaks of the MTF50 curves, but the green channel of the Sigma is actually sharper. I’ll put that down to the slightly higher resolution of the D850 vis-a-vis the a7RII.

Stopping down helps sharpness a lot, but not LoCA.

One more stop:

That green channel sharpness is darned impressive, and f/2.8 is the sharpest stop for that channel. The LoCA is less impressive.

At f/4, all the channels are very sharp.

At f/5.6, the depth of field (DOF) is starting to cover up the LoCA.

At f/8 you’re not going to see the LoCA; the DOF will mask it.

This is a solid performance. 

D850

← Sigma 105/2.8 macro LoCA on D850 Sigma 35/1.4 LoCA on D850 →

Comments

  1. Arthur says

    November 29, 2017 at 12:11 pm

    Jim,

    I know that you need the razor to be close enough to be able to get a suitable size ROI so am left wondering what is the distance between the razor and the sensor ?

    The reason I ask is that Zeiss publishes duplicate MTFs for f 1.4 and f4 and that the close focus charts have lower MTFs than the infinity focus versions.

    Arthur

    Reply
    • JimK says

      November 29, 2017 at 12:35 pm

      The distances are marked on the plots and stated in the protocols for each test. For the 85 mm Sigma, the distance was 1.5 meters.

      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.