the last word

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

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / Lens screening testing / Goals for this test

Goals for this test

Here is what I’m trying to accomplish with this test regime.

Fairly easily performable by non-experts. We’ll see how well I’ve accomplished this goal. I’ve been surprised and disappointed by the number of people who have been unable to follow the simpler instructions in my Simple Decentering Test, so I’m not totally confident. Nevertheless, I have hopes. The exposures can be made in a five minutes, once the target and camera are set up. Postprocessing for a set of images takes another ten minutes, using Lightroom.

High tolerance for setup departures from perfection. This is really another aspect of ease of performing the test. Alignment is not critical. Target distance is not critical once a minimum is attained (and, truth be told, even that minimum distance can be shaded without much penalty). Exposure is not critical; all that is required is that no part of the target be clipped.

Setup errors manifest visually. One of the biggest problems with using full frame flat targets is that setup errors can produce the same visual effects as lens misalignment. In this test, many setup errors are detectable from their effect on the captures. Misfocusing, for example, will show up with good lenses as an absence of aliasing and false color in the target-centered capture. One error which will not stand out as such and can lead to false positives is a shift in lens focus distance during a single set of captures. For this reason, I recommend that the test be repeated if the results point towards a misaligned lens. It is highly unlikely that any jarring of the lens will result in the same focus shift pattern in the second test.

No calculations need to be performed by the tester. It is true that there are some calculations involved in the test, but I’ve performed them in advance for a variety of cameras and posted the results here. All the tested need do is find the right graph, and read off the minimum distance for the chosen camera, f-stop, and focal length to be tested.

One target can test most lenses. If the target is large enough, you only need the one. But a target for a very fast, very short lens can get large and unwieldy. For most focal lengths and f-stops, a single 17-inch Siemens Star target should suffice. For the more demanding cases, I have provided graphs that allow the tester to see how big the target needs to be.

Visual analysis of results. There are many lens testing regimes that incorporate a computer analysis of the captured images. They have advantages, the chief one being quantitative results. However, they require that the tester learn to use a computer program as well as gain an understanding of some moderately-sophisticated optical, engineering, and mathematical concepts. This test is different. You can see what’s going on just by looking at the images with the proper mindset. That makes it doable by a far greater range of photographers.

Detect defects with some specificity. This test is capable of detecting field flatness errors, field tilt, astigmatism, coma, spherical aberration, and other lens defects that result in degradation of off-axis sharpness. If any of these is suspected after the first test, it is sometimes possible to construct related tests to figure out what’s going on. For example, corner softness could be the result of field curvature or field tilt, or something else. Running another test with focusing in the corners instead of the center can tell you which of those three things you’re up against. This part of the test is a work in progress. With the help of Brandon Dube, a lens design expert, I hope to attain more precision here.

Work with almost any raw development workflow. Learning a new raw converter or a new image-editing suite is a lot of trouble. I wanted a test that would work with whatever software the user is comfortable with, and I think I have one.

 

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • 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 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 Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals
  • Sarmed Mirza on Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals
  • lancej on Two ways to improve the Q2 handling
  • JimK on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • K on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.