Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
p.5 #1Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
DavidBM wrote:
I don't think it's defective. I had a hard time removing my front cap as well. It will come off, just rotate it. Did you get a link to download the latest firmware? If so, what link?Thanks Fred. How hard did you force it? I am always nervous about applying too much and then breaking something.
RE: link for updating firmware - I have no idea. Haven't explored it yet given that I can't even get the back cap off.
@Arka@@@ @Fred Miranda@@
Where did you guys order from?I ordered direct from Techart, which - oddly - appears to be the only way you get a guarantee! It’s shipped and arrives in the next couple of days.
Interesting. I ordered mine from B+H several days ago, still says pre-order. Maybe I should cancel and order from Techart as they are already shipping.
Donzo98 wrote
Arka wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Arka wrote
Just got mine. How do you get the hub/back cap off? The little thing that I think is the release button doesn't do anything. Should it really be as simple as pushing the little metal button and unscrewing? If so, I think mine might be defective... ::sigh::RE: link for updating firmware - I have no idea. Haven't explored it yet given that I can't even get the back cap off.
Where did you guys order from?
Interesting. I ordered mine from B+H several days ago, still says pre-order. Maybe I should cancel and order from Techart as they are already shipping.
Aug 28, 2022 at 02:39 PM
p.5 #2Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Don't forget that is for some reasons you need to exchange it/return it, with B&H will be much easier!
Aug 28, 2022 at 06:13 PM
p.5 #3Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
I ordered mine on the 17 from Techart and they haven't shipped anything yet. It just shows processing whatever that means.
Aug 28, 2022 at 07:19 PM
p.5 #4Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Mine arrived from TechArt
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
Aug 28, 2022 at 11:29 PM
p.5 #5Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
why is that and what do you think is causing this?
DavidBM wrote:
Mine arrived from TechArt
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
DavidBM wrote:
Mine arrived from TechArt
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
Aug 29, 2022 at 08:05 AM
p.5 #6Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
DavidBM wrote:
Mine arrived from TechArt
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
Well that is baffling. I can't think of any reason for different performance from such similar lenses.
Mine arrived from TechArt
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
Well that is baffling. I can't think of any reason for different performance from such similar lenses.
Aug 29, 2022 at 08:23 AM
p.5 #7Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
I'm getting worried now! I hope it'll work fine with Noctilux 0.95!
Aug 29, 2022 at 06:15 PM
p.5 #8Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
esanchez wrote:
why is that and what do you think is causing this?
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
why is that and what do you think is causing this?
DavidBM wrote
Mine arrived from TechArtIt’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Aug 30, 2022 at 04:45 AM
p.5 #9Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
DavidBM wrote:
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
esanchez wrote
why is that and what do you think is causing this?DavidBM wrote
Mine arrived from TechArtIt’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Aug 30, 2022 at 12:46 PM
p.5 #10Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
DavidBM wrote
esanchez wrote
why is that and what do you think is causing this?DavidBM wrote
Mine arrived from TechArtIt’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
Aug 31, 2022 at 05:34 AM
|
p.5 #11Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
DavidBM wrote:
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
esanchez wrote
why is that and what do you think is causing this?DavidBM wrote
Mine arrived from TechArtIt’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?
Aug 31, 2022 at 07:22 AM
p.5 #12Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
It’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?
By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
DavidBM wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
esanchez wrote
why is that and what do you think is causing this?DavidBM wrote
Mine arrived from TechArtIt’s interesting what it works well on and doesn’t.
It’s great on my Zuiko 1.2/55, not so great on my Zuiko 1.2/50 (hats the difference), great on 2/28 but terrible on 2.8/28 - which is sharper than the f2 version.
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
Aug 31, 2022 at 07:42 AM
p.5 #13Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
BastianK wrote:
If I had a good theory I would have shared it!
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
esanchez wrote
why is that and what do you think is causing this?My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.
Aug 31, 2022 at 07:57 AM
p.5 #14Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.
I even sent them videos of the good working and (similar) not well working lenses.
Conclusion: they don't have a clue why some lenses work well and others don't.
BastianK wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
If I had a good theory I would have shared it!My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
I even sent them videos of the good working and (similar) not well working lenses.
Conclusion: they don't have a clue why some lenses work well and others don't.
Aug 31, 2022 at 08:08 AM
p.5 #15Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
BastianK wrote:
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.I even sent them videos of the good working and (similar) not well working lenses.
Conclusion: they don't have a clue why some lenses work well and others don't.
Fred Miranda wrote
BastianK wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Hi David,Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
Conclusion: they don't have a clue why some lenses work well and others don't.
Aug 31, 2022 at 08:22 AM
p.5 #16Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!Hi David,
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.
I'm still waiting for my adapter (ordered on the 10th). A question: Those lenses that work or don't work in the corners, is there any difference between focusing them on "dead" objects or on people with the Face Detect/Eye-AF? If I remember correctly, the Face Detect/Eye-AF uses the CDAF more, than the PDAF, that is why I ask. Thanks!
BastianK wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
If I had a good theory I would have shared it!My guess - and it's an extreme guess - is that there are two factors;
(1) The degree of telecentricity of these lenses might vary; and more telecentric lenses might AF better in the outer field
(2) is the exact amount and type of lateral CA might confuse the AF in the outer field to different degrees.
It works fine in the inner area though!
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
I'm still waiting for my adapter (ordered on the 10th). A question: Those lenses that work or don't work in the corners, is there any difference between focusing them on "dead" objects or on people with the Face Detect/Eye-AF? If I remember correctly, the Face Detect/Eye-AF uses the CDAF more, than the PDAF, that is why I ask. Thanks!
Aug 31, 2022 at 09:06 AM
p.5 #17Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
lattesweden wrote:
Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.Yep!
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.I'm still waiting for my adapter (ordered on the 10th). A question: Those lenses that work or don't work in the corners, is there any difference between focusing them on "dead" objects or on people with the Face Detect/Eye-AF? If I remember correctly, the Face Detect/Eye-AF uses the CDAF more, than the PDAF, that is why I ask. Thanks!
I saw absolutely zero difference. Either it works or it doesn't.
Fred Miranda wrote
BastianK wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Hi David,Did you upgrade to the latest version? They keep tweaking it.
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
I saw absolutely zero difference. Either it works or it doesn't.
Aug 31, 2022 at 11:03 AM
p.5 #18Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
BastianK wrote:
Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!My guess is that the lens with lower performance has a mid-field dip wide open?By my experience it has nothing to do with that.
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.I've asked Techart about this. Let's see what they say.I'm still waiting for my adapter (ordered on the 10th). A question: Those lenses that work or don't work in the corners, is there any difference between focusing them on "dead" objects or on people with the Face Detect/Eye-AF? If I remember correctly, the Face Detect/Eye-AF uses the CDAF more, than the PDAF, that is why I ask. Thanks!I saw absolutely zero difference. Either it works or it doesn't.
Thanks! Good to know, then I can just test all my vintage lenses at home on static scenes and single out which ones work good and not.
lattesweden wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
BastianK wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
DavidBM wrote
Yep!Gotta say I’m pretty happy with it. It works just fine in the central box of a ROT grid on every lens I’ve tried, and variability in the outer field is to be expected. I’m more surprised how good it is in the outer field on some lenses, than disappointed that it doesn’t work so well there on others!
I tried it with very high resolving lenses and it doesn't work at all outside the central area whereas it "magically" works with actually pretty bad lenses (resolution/contrast wise) right into the corners.
My guess is still that the AF algorithm needs information on the lateral CA of the lens to make proper use of the phase detect pixels.
I don't have enough (or any) knowledge about the AF algorithms and if lateral CA correction is already applied before the focus operation though, which would be a clear indicator of my theory.
Thanks! Good to know, then I can just test all my vintage lenses at home on static scenes and single out which ones work good and not.
Aug 31, 2022 at 11:27 AM
p.5 #19Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Does stopping down the 'problem' lenses cure the problem?
Aug 31, 2022 at 11:34 AM
p.5 #20Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
bemei wrote:
Does stopping down the 'problem' lenses cure the problem?
Not to the slightest, no. Either it works in the corners or it doesn't.
At least for the ~15 lenses I tried so far.
Does stopping down the 'problem' lenses cure the problem?
Not to the slightest, no. Either it works in the corners or it doesn't.
At least for the ~15 lenses I tried so far.
Aug 31, 2022 at 03:07 PM