p.1 #1 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
So here are 2 shots taken with my a7R III at f/16. One lens is a modern native Zeiss.....and the other isn't modern, native or a Zeiss. Without looking at the EXIF, which one do you think is the Zeiss. I've include links to the full size processed JPEGs. Note just exposure and color balance was changed, just to equalize the look of the two. Otherwise the same processing was applied to both shots.
p.1 #4 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
The clouds are nicer in shot number two, I definitely have to agree with that. It's getting late here on the East Coast.....don't mean to leave anyone hanging, but I'll post which one is the Zeiss in the morning.
They are both manual focus lenses, not much of a hint other than maybe helping to identify which particular Zeiss it is.
p.1 #8 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
Hiepphotog was correct on guessing which lenses were in play here. But the first shot is the Zeiss Loxia 25mm, and the second is the SMC Pentax 28mm f/3.5 K.
I find some modern lenses seem to take a pretty steep dive around f/16. The Pentax seems to slide steadily from f/11 to f/16.
The Loxia 21, 25 and the Pentax 28 (with adapter) are all around the same size and share a 52mm filter thread. I know that's a tight spread of focal lengths, but I do a lot of shooting between 20 and 30 (mainly landscapes.)
p.1 #10 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
tsdevine wrote:
Hiepphotog was correct on guessing which lenses were in play here. But the first shot is the Zeiss Loxia 25mm, and the second is the SMC Pentax 28mm f/3.5 K.
I find some modern lenses seem to take a pretty step dive around f/16. The Pentax seems to slide steadily from f/11 to f/16.
The Loxia 21, 25 and the Pentax 28 (with adapter) are all around the same size and share a 52mm filter thread. I know that's a tight spread of focal lengths, but I do a lot of shooting between 20 and 30 (mainly landscapes.)
-Tim
WOW, that's a big WOW for me. I would have never guessed that the Pentax would have beaten the Loxia at any aperture. It's an eye opener for sure.
p.1 #11 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
Thanks Fred. It seems like the Loxia starts to suffer at the extreme periphery at f/16, I notice the same thing with the GM 24. I realize many wouldn't stop down to f/16, but without focus stacking, there are times where I need to do it for depth of field.
-Tim
Fred Miranda wrote:
Great test Tim.
At f/16 it's very hard to tell one lens from another.
p.1 #12 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
I bought a very good copy off Fred, but this particular copy seems to me to be ever so slightly better. I paid $37 shipped for this copy. I use a Novoflex adapter which for which I spent many times more money than the lens. How funny is that.
-Tim
hiepphotog wrote:
WOW, that's a big WOW for me. I would have never guessed that the Pentax would have beaten the Loxia at any aperture. It's an eye opener for sure.
p.1 #14 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
I am impressed. Actually, before buying loxia 21 I tried a nikon 21 ais and the difference was enormous in my opinion. Nevertheless here is not the case just contrary. What about our 200mm discussion? Something simmilar may happen ?
p.1 #15 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
The Pentax-k 28 3.5 is a fantastic lens and IMO one of the best legacy 28 lenses around. The are rare to find for sale these days so if you can find a good copy would recommend holding on to it.
p.1 #16 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
I don't think I've actually shot the OM 200/5 lens at f/16. I do believe f/11 was acceptable, but f/8 was still better. It would probably come down to depth of field needed.
-Tim
hanay78 wrote:
I am impressed. Actually, before buying loxia 21 I tried a nikon 21 ais and the difference was enormous in my opinion. Nevertheless here is not the case just contrary. What about our 200mm discussion? Something simmilar may happen ?
p.1 #17 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
Here is f/11. Note that the Pentax doesn't have sufficient depth of field to have the extreme foreground be in focus. The Loxia has some advantage by being a wider lens.
p.1 #18 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
I'm embarrassed to say I have quite a few copies. The prices have gone up significantly since I started posting comparisons here (and probably even more so when Phillip Reeve posted his review.)
-Tim
Eddie88 wrote:
The Pentax-k 28 3.5 is a fantastic lens and IMO one of the best legacy 28 lenses around. The are rare to find for sale these days so if you can find a good copy would recommend holding on to it.
p.1 #19 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
Good examples of how any shot can be ruined by too much diffraction. They both look very soft and then sharpened which illustrates just how important using optimum aperture is more important than ever as sensors get higher and higher in resolution. So much of my work is architectural interiors, where I need both depth of field and detail. it's sometimes a struggle to find the best compromise going past f8 or f11. The latest C1 Pro has a diffraction slider on the lens compensation panel, but haven't really studied the results yet to know if it really helps.
p.1 #20 · Diffraction the great equalizer? (Guess what the lenses are)
I'm not sure any ruining of the shot is solely the aperture here. I'm reacquainting myself with C1 (and playing around with some others) as I'm hedging my bets on my normal go to RAW processor. I've been using Photo Ninja for quite a few years, but there hasn't been many updates in a long time. They are supposedly rewriting it.....but that's been the guidance for years as well. So I'm not extremely comfortable with the controls yet.
I also didn't tailor sharpening for the f/11 shots as I wanted to use the same settings as f/16, so that people could compare apples to apples.
I didn't use the diffraction setting as C1 in it's wisdom doesn't allow you to set the aperture with manual lenses (for this feature), so I turned it off in order for parity in processing for comparison purposes.
-Tim
stevesanacore wrote:
Good examples of how any shot can be ruined by too much diffraction. They both look very soft and then sharpened which illustrates just how important using optimum aperture is more important than ever as sensors get higher and higher in resolution. So much of my work is architectural interiors, where I need both depth of field and detail. it's sometimes a struggle to find the best compromise going past f8 or f11. The latest C1 Pro has a diffraction slider on the lens compensation panel, but haven't really studied the results yet to know if it really helps.
