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 / The Last Word / 24/3.8 Elmar corner smear with a7R & a7RII

24/3.8 Elmar corner smear with a7R & a7RII

August 12, 2015 By JimK 2 Comments

We’ve seen in previous posts that the Sony a7RII does wonders for the color casts that beset the a7R when used with short, pseudo-symmetric rangefinder lenses. Since the sensor stack is still the same thickness, I don’t expect any improvement in corner smear, but it’s certainly worth testing.

I attached a Leica 24mm f/3.8 Elmar-M ASPH to each camera and made an aperture series of this scene, shown at f/8:

a7RII
a7RII
a7R
a7R

Both images were developed in Lightroom with daylight white balance. The greater falloff of the a7R and the magenta corner casts are evident.

Checking the center at 300% magnification:

a7RII
a7RII
a7R
a7R

Similar sharpness.

Now the lower left corners, with a one-stop boost in exposure.

a7RII f/3.4
a7RII f/3.8
a7R f/3.4
a7R f/3.8

Same poor sharpness.

a7RII f/5.6
a7RII f/5.6
a7R f/5.6
a7R f/5.6

Same sharpness

a7RII f/8
a7RII f/8
a7R f/8
a7R f/8

Bored yet?

a7RII f/11
a7RII f/11
a7R f/11
a7R f/11

Same.

a7RII f/16
a7RII f/16
a7R f/16
a7R f/16

Same.

I guess we’ll have to wit for the Kolari thin stack modification to see sharper corners with rangefinder lenses.

← 18/3.8 Super-Elmar corner smear with a7R & a7RII Sony a7RII pushed bookcase images →

Comments

  1. Karl Beath Photography says

    August 24, 2015 at 1:00 am

    Hi Jim

    Thanx for all the reviews.

    I am assuming that this should read 24/3.8 Elmar, or is it 21/3.4 Elmar?

    Karl

    Reply
    • Jim says

      August 24, 2015 at 2:04 pm

      Yep. I’ll fix it. Thanks,

      Jim

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

January 2021
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
« Dec    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • 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 Sony a7RIV with pixel-shift vs Fujifilm GFX 100
  • Ludwig Haskins on Sony a7RIV with pixel-shift vs Fujifilm GFX 100
  • Anthony New on Camera resolution and 4K viewing — summary
  • Ilya Zakharevich on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • JimK on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • JimK on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • CarVac on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • JimK on Detectability of visual signals below the noise
  • JimK on Does repeated JPEG compression ruin images?
  • Bill Claff on Detectability of visual signals below the noise

Archives

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.