RoamingScott wrote:
I'd love to see a RAW file of the photo in the OP. I smell post processing issues, not lens or sensor issues.
Yes, it's quite obvious that the image files were aggressively edited, whether internally by the camera or afterwards.
RoamingScott wrote:
I'd love to see a RAW file of the photo in the OP. I smell post processing issues, not lens or sensor issues.
The enlarged view yogifi posted clearly shows CA.
- maybe the lens isn't fully corrected for the Sony stupid thick cover glass. Sample variation?
- maybe the camera software messed it up
- maybe it's a mistake made during PP with the handle for CA compensation not in zero/neutral position
Yes, it would be good seeing the raw file (but maybe there is none). I checked my own copy of the 50 AIR and can agree about the lack of CA (not absolute zero but so good one can say there is no CA).
Here is a simple test (boring tech test) not many lenses manage:
Above: Sony A1 with the Viltrox 50/2 AIR at ƒ2
EDIT: Added "Sample variation?" to the first maybe... line.
Yogifi wrote:
[...]
A cheap vintage 50mm on the left, apo-lanthar 50/2 right, both at f8:
[2 images]
It's at 630% zoom with a 33 megapixel camera. Even at < 100% you can notice somethings not right, especially with the water.
[...]
Hi Yogifi...
630% crop is never needed. I think it's way better posting 100% crops if wanting to do a close-up technical comparison. Anyone interested can then download it and check it their own preferred way.
I mean you can see the yellow blue odd painted lines in those crops, it is zoomed in a bunch but still.
This is 100% crop from an apo-lanthar at f8 - well it was before uploading, I'm not exactly sure what the final zoom is once the image host gets its hands on it.
It looks like CA but I THINK it's a type of moire. I've seen it on other sharp lenses. I can point it at leaves in the sky and it won't show much of anything odd, but every now and then, there's these artefacts.
I was looking into it somewhat with the nokton 28/1.5 where it really irritated me. Random yellow and blue even in non-high contrast shaded parts of the scene, at random almost.
The above is moire (being yellow gives it away) and I've seen a ton of examples like this on Sony sensors for whatever reason. It's rare I see it on my Nikon CVs.
You can see it on a bunch of different hi-res cameras including the Fuji GFX when you zoom in using dpreviews comparison scene tool.
I was checking when trying to decide on whether or not to get the A7CR as I thought perhaps a higher resolution will stop it with the nokton 28/1.5, but I think it's the AA filter that cuts back on it quite a bit. Higher resolution improves it a little I think, but from that comparison tool, definitely not completely, and in some areas the moire was worse.
In OP's photo I feel like it might still be moire (near the lamposts and trees, painted on the cars) in the screengrabs I showed. It's not a particularly high contrast scene and it's kind of everywhere, including shaded areas. -- I'm no expert though.
But yes I think the main issue was that it looked like it was downsized then upscaled and sharpened.
@ Yogifi. What you are showing looks definitely like CA. I view my images on a 24" DELL screen and do not view them at +200 %, so I did not notice that CA. I would be surprised if the Viltrox 50 Air out-resolves the A7RV but, one never knows. However, someone with a larger, high end screen will certainly see defaults I cannot make out.
Thank you for pointing this out. I still like what comes out of this lens
@ Jonas B. On my 24" screen the image as sized occupies the entire screen. I use mild sharpening (I believe 0.2) and I do indeed shoot JPEG only. But I am surprised you see sharpening artifacts.
jowul wrote:
@ Jonas B. On my 24" screen the image as sized occupies the entire screen. I use mild sharpening (I believe 0.2) and I do indeed shoot JPEG only. But I am surprised you see sharpening artifacts.
Hi jowul,
You are right. I should have checked and rechecked before writing that but I obviously didn't use my brain. What I was taking for sharpening halos is the blue CA around some of the far away trees and lamp posts. Visible as lighter areas at those places as the background is bright. My fault.
But the CA... Is it the camera or the lens? You can try taking a some images with high contrast lines but have the camera set to RAW+JPG and then check the images in a raw converter.
@ Nifty Fifty. I checked the settings in my camera (which I had purchased used) and noticed that in the Creative Look W2 setting I had Clarity at 5, Sharpness at 5 and Sharpness Range at 3. I now dialed them back to 1
In my JPEG editing SW I have Clarity at 1 and Sharpness at 02.
So Nifty Fifty's suspicion was correct.
I'll keep on shooting and monitor if I get any more photos from the Viltrox Air 50/2.0 with CA
jowul wrote:
@ Nifty Fifty. I checked the settings in my camera (which I had purchased used) and noticed that in the Creative Look W2 setting I had Clarity at 5, Sharpness at 5 and Sharpness Range at 3. I now dialed them back to 1
In my JPEG editing SW I have Clarity at 1 and Sharpness at 02.
So Nifty Fifty's suspicion was correct.
I'll keep on shooting and monitor if I get any more photos from the Viltrox Air 50/2.0 with CA
Brilliant, that was probably most responsible for the weird look, at least to my eyes.
