This is part 18 in a series of posts on a prototype of the Kolari Vision thin-stack sensor modification for the Sony a7II. The series starts here.
The Leica 16-18-21mm f/4 Tri-Elmar-M performs well on the a7II at all focal lengths, and better at 21mm with the Kolari stack. How does the Kolari thin stack on the a7II compare with the Leica M240 with that lens attached to each? Both cameras have 24 MP. Neither camera has an AA filter. The Leica has special angled micro lenses, and camera firmware that reads a 6 bit code off the lens and performs optimization based on the lens model number.
The scene at f/8 with both cameras at 21mm
. I focused on the center with live view with both cameras. With the Leica M240, that’s the only option. Maybe I’m stacking the deck against the a7II, but I figured it would be cheating to use the put-the-focus-point-anywhere feature of the Sony to focus in the corner.
Both images were developed in Lightroom with the default settings, except that the white balance was set to daylight. Lens profiles were turned off. Lightroom does some lens-dependent sharpening that is not defeatable, however. Lr knows what lens it thinks is on the Leica, and it has no idea what lens is on the a7II because the adapter doesn’t provide it with that information. Let’s look at the center at 3:1 enlargement to make sure that Lr is not stacking the deck in favor of one of the cameras.
Except for the white balance difference and a tad more contrast in the Kolari image, they look the same to me.
Now let’s look at the lower left corner at all the whole apertures that the lens can use. I brightened the corners to compensate for lens falloff.
I think the Kolari is a hair better.
They’re the same, but both are reasonably heavily hit be diffraction.
Serious diffraction. Both the same.
With the WATE, the Kolari-modded a7II is the equal of the M240.
Matti Meikalainen says
It would be nice to get some astigmatism tests on Kolari vs. no-Kolari…
Very interesting tests, thank you!
and go forward one at a time.