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 / Kolari Vision thin-stack mod on a7II — Leica 24/3.8 Elmar-M

Kolari Vision thin-stack mod on a7II — Leica 24/3.8 Elmar-M

July 23, 2015 By JimK Leave a Comment

This is part 3 in a series of posts on a prototype of the Kolari Vision thin-stack sensor modification for the Sony a7II. The series starts here.

Not a worst case lens at all, the Leica 24mm f/3.8 Elmar-M ASPH is an good performer on the a8II, provided you stop it down a bit. How does it do with the Kolari Vision think-stack modification on the a7II?

The scene, at f/3.8:

Standard stack
Standard stack
Kolari thin stack
Kolari thin stack

White balance in Lightroom set to Daylight, and the different spectral response of the Kolari stack comes across loud and clear.

Let’s run through the whole stop apertures, compensate for the lens falloff with 2/3 EV exposure move, and blow up the upper right corner to 3:1.

Standard f/4
Standard f/4
Kolari f/4
Kolari f/4

Wow! That’s a pretty amazing difference. The Elmar corners are useful even wide open with the Kolari stack.

Standard f/5.6
Standard f/5.6
Kolari f/5.6
Kolari f/5.6

The standard stack image improves as the lens is stopped down, but it’s still no match for the Kolari modified image.

Standard f/8
Standard f/8
Kolari f/8
Kolari f/8

The standard stack is coming on strong at f/8, but it’s still behind the Kolari modded one.

Standard f/11
Standard f/11
Kolari f/11
Kolari f/11

This is as good as the standard stack gets, and the Kolari is a hair better.

Standard f/16
Standard f/16
Kolari f/16
Kolari f/16

Pretty close, as diffraction really sets in, but I’d give the nod to Kolari.

 

← Kolari Vision thin-stack mod on a7II — 35/2.8 Zony FE Kolari Vision thin-stack mod on a7II — Zeiss 35/2 Biogon-M →

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Your email address will not be published.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.