• 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 / The Last Word / Testing for decentering by the numbers

Testing for decentering by the numbers

March 26, 2016 JimK 4 Comments

Yesterday I posted the results of a fairly simple decentering test that requires only an ISO 12233 target, some lighting, a tripod, and a few minutes.

Today I’ll show you what happens when you use a slanted edge sharpness analyzer — in this case, Imatest — on the images you saw yesterday.

Here’s a crop of the part of the target we need for the testing:

_DSC6285-3

We’ll use those black bars for the slanted edges.

Here’s what Imatest does with the horizontal (ish) edge when it’s centered:

_DSC6285_YBL14_01_sfr

And Here’s the vertical edge results for the centered image:

_DSC6285-2_YA39_01_sfr

Here are the tabulated results for the center and all four corners:

decentered test sony 90 numbers

The two beige rows are the centers; the others are the corners.

Imatest labels the horizontal edges as vertical, since the MTFxx is calculated in a vertical direction. The reverse is true for the other edge orientation.

There’s not much pattern here. The center isn’t always the sharpest; which is probably the result of slight misfocusing. The corner that’s the sharpest in Imatest’s vertical orientation is the weakest in the horizontal one. The reverse is true, too.

If we average the numbers some semblance of sense seems to arise:

decentered test sony 90 numbers 2

Now you can see that they’re all about the same, which is what it looked like by eye.

 

The Last Word

← Testing for decentering by eye Serial monogamy in camera ownership →

Comments

  1. Jim says

    March 28, 2016 at 10:08 am

    A reader sent me the following in an email: “On your latest ‘decentering’ testing I noticed that Imatest was giving the ‘clipping warning’. This may have an effect on your results – possibly masking decentering effects. ”

    I’m glad you pointed that out. When most lenses are tested wide open, there is significant edge falloff. That is certainly the case with both the Sony 90/2.8 and the Sony 70-200/4. When doing slanted edge testing near the corners, it is my practice to make sure that there is adequate exposure there, which sometimes results in Imatest’s giving a clipping warning for the center crops, although I am careful to make sure that no actual clipping occurs. It is possible that the center crop MTF reading are slightly higher than Imatest is reporting because the image has values within a stop of full scale. However, the center readings are not used in determining decentering, just the corner ones.

    Jim

    Reply
  2. Jerry says

    June 25, 2018 at 11:15 pm

    There were many discussions on MTF difference in the vertical and horizontal direction caused by asymmetric AA filters, but what about big differences we can often see in the same direction? The crop above is a perfect example of this phenomenon. The right and top edges are blurry, while left and bottom ones are sharp. The MTF values for the two edges in the same direction and in the same part of the image are totally different (just as the MTF at Nyquist). How can you explain it and which MTF value is correct?

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Testing for decentering by the numbers with AF | The Last Word says:
    March 27, 2016 at 12:22 pm

    […] verifies that that’s not an Imatest error. Going back to the manual focusing testing here and here indicates that, in fact, there’s noting wrong with the lower right corner (DSC6288). It looks […]

    Reply
  2. Simple decentering test | The Last Word says:
    April 5, 2016 at 5:07 pm

    […] Testing for decentering by the numbers […]

    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.