Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

  

  Previous versions of pythonz's message #16475122 « Sunstars: Nikon 14-30 & Nikon 24-120 compared to Voigtlander »

  

pythonz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Sunstars: Nikon 14-30 & Nikon 24-120 compared to Voigtlander


I primarily do landscape photography and the Nikon 14-30 and 24-120 F4 are my two favorite lenses for their amazing image quality and versatility. However, I've found myself wanting in the category of sunstars, especially on the 14-30 where they don't really begin to show until F16 where diffraction has a very noticeable impact on contrast and sharpness. I've heard they're slightly better on the 14-24 F2.8, but not by much. The Z lens lineup in general doesn't seem to do sunstars very well.

I started looking into Voigtlander lenses as a potential alternative with their straight aperture blade design, which have been shown to produce the type of look that I'm going for. I recently picked up the Voigtlander 21mm F1.4 and 110mm F2.5 for the Sony E-mount along with an adapter to use on my Nikon Z7ii and did 3 separate tests to compare the sunstar rendering and overall look with the two Z lenses.

To emulate a landscape environment where one would expect to start seeing sunstars, I took 4 images of each scene on a tripod from F5.6 to F16 in 1-stop increments. Shutter speed was adjusted to keep the exposure consistent. The images were exported from Capture One with all adjustments set to 0 aside from sharpening/noise reduction values being set to my current defaults and kelvin/tint values being manually set for consistency (some had a noticeable green/magenta tint).

For all tests, the Nikon image is at the top and the Voigtlander is at the bottom

Test 1: Nikon 14-30mm F4 @21mm vs. Voigtlander 21mm F1.4

Main conclusions from this test:
Nikon 14-30: sunstars don't really appear until F11, but become noticeably larger at F16. The sunstar rays fade as they taper outwards.
Voigtlander 21: sunstars are visible at F5.6 and continue to grow sightly until F16, where the sunstar suddenly loses its defined shape and becomes hazy. There are fewer rays than the Nikon 14-30 at all apertures, and they end in sharp points rather than gradually tapering outwards.

Because the sunstars appear much earlier on the Voigtlander, it's possible to get well-defined sunstars in images before diffraction starts having a noticeable impact on image quality. I consider this a pretty big advantage - looking at some of my previous images taken on the 14-30 where I stopped down to F16 for noticeable sunstars, I can't help but feel like detail and sharpness are lacking, even after post processing. The Voigtlander would've been great to have in those situations.



Feb 19, 2024 at 03:28 PM
pythonz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Sunstars: Nikon 14-30 & Nikon 24-120 compared to Voigtlander


I primarily do landscape photography and the Nikon 14-30 and 24-120 F4 are my two favorite lenses for their amazing image quality and versatility. However, I've found myself wanting in the category of sunstars, especially on the 14-30 where they don't really begin to show until F16 where diffraction has a very noticeable impact on contrast and sharpness. I've heard they're slightly better on the 14-24 F2.8, but not by much. The Z lens lineup in general doesn't seem to do sunstars very well.

I started looking into Voigtlander lenses as a potential alternative with their straight aperture blade design, which have been shown to produce the type of look that I'm going for. I recently picked up the Voigtlander 21mm F1.4 and 110mm F2.5 for the Sony E-mount along with an adapter to use on my Nikon Z7ii and did 3 separate tests to compare the sunstar rendering and overall look with the two Z lenses.

To emulate a landscape environment where one would expect to start seeing sunstars, I took 4 images of each scene on a tripod from F5.6 to F16 in 1-stop increments. Shutter speed was adjusted to keep the exposure consistent. I picked slightly different locations around my apartment complex for each test, specifically looking for areas with bright points of light that could potentially produce sunstars. The images were exported from Capture One with all adjustments set to 0 aside from sharpening/noise reduction values being set to my current defaults and kelvin/tint values being manually set for consistency (some had a noticeable green/magenta tint). This is my first time trying something like this, so please let me know if I've overlooked some important details.

For all tests, the Nikon image is at the top and the Voigtlander is at the bottom

Test 1: Nikon 14-30mm F4 @21mm vs. Voigtlander 21mm F1.4

Main conclusions from this test:
Nikon 14-30: sunstars don't really appear until F11, but become noticeably larger at F16. The sunstar rays fade as they taper outwards.
Voigtlander 21: sunstars are visible at F5.6 and continue to grow sightly until F16, where the sunstar suddenly loses its defined shape and becomes hazy. There are fewer rays than the Nikon 14-30 at all apertures, and they end in sharp points rather than gradually tapering outwards.

Because the sunstars appear much earlier on the Voigtlander, it's possible to get well-defined sunstars in images before diffraction starts having a noticeable impact on image quality. I consider this a pretty big advantage - looking at some of my previous images taken on the 14-30 where I stopped down to F16 for noticeable sunstars, I can't help but feel like detail and sharpness are lacking, even after post processing. The Voigtlander would've been great to have in those situations.



Feb 19, 2024 at 05:48 AM
pythonz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Sunstars: Nikon 14-30 & Nikon 24-120 compared to Voigtlander


I primarily do landscape photography and the Nikon 14-30 and 24-120 F4 are my two favorite lenses for their amazing image quality and versatility. However, I've found myself wanting in the category of sunstars, especially on the 14-30 where they don't really begin to show until F16 where diffraction has a very noticeable impact on contrast and sharpness. I've heard they're slightly better on the 14-24 F2.8, but not by much. The Z lens lineup in general doesn't seem to do sunstars very well.

I started looking into Voigtlander lenses as a potential alternative with their straight aperture blade design, which have been shown to produce the type of look that I'm going for. I recently picked up the Voigtlander 21mm F1.4 and 110mm F2.5 for the Sony E-mount along with an adapter to use on my Nikon Z7ii and did 3 separate tests to compare the sunstar rendering and overall look with the two Z lenses.

To emulate a landscape environment where one would expect to start seeing sunstars, I took 4 images of each scene on a tripod from F5.6 to F16 in 1-stop increments. Shutter speed was adjusted to keep the exposure consistent. I picked slightly different locations around my apartment complex for each test, specifically looking for areas with bright points of light that could potentially produce sunstars. The images were exported from Capture One with all adjustments set to 0 aside from sharpening/noise reduction values being set to my current defaults and kelvin/tint values being manually set for consistency (some had a noticeable green/magenta tint). This is my first time trying something like this, so please let me know if I've overlooked some important details.

For all tests, the Nikon image is at the top and the Voigtlander is at the bottom

Test 1: Nikon 14-30mm F4 @21mm vs. Voigtlander 21mm F1.4

Main conclusions from this test:
Nikon 14-30: sunstars don't really appear until F11, but become noticeably larger at F16. The sunstar rays fade as they taper outwards.
Voigtlander 21: sunstars are visible at F5.6 and continue to grow sightly until F16, where the sunstar suddenly loses its defined shape and becomes hazy. There are fewer rays than the Nikon 14-30 at all apertures, and they end in sharp points rather than gradually tapering outwards.

Because the sunstars appear much earlier on the Voigtlander, it's possible to get well-defined sunstars in images before diffraction starts having a noticeable impact on image quality. I consider this a pretty big advantage - looking at some of my previous images taken on the 14-30 where I stopped down to F16 for noticeable sunstars, I can't help but feel like detail and sharpness are lacking, even after post processing. The Voigtlander would've been great to have in those situations.



Feb 19, 2024 at 05:44 AM
pythonz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Sunstars: Nikon 14-30 & Nikon 24-120 compared to Voigtlander


I primarily do landscape photography and the Nikon 14-30 and 24-120 F4 are my two favorite lenses for their amazing image quality and versatility. However, I've found myself wanting in the category of sunstars, especially on the 14-30 where they don't really begin to show until F16 where diffraction has a very noticeable impact on contrast and sharpness. I've heard they're slightly better on the 14-24 F2.8, but not by much. The Z lens lineup in general doesn't seem to do sunstars very well.

I started looking into Voigtlander lenses as a potential alternative with their straight aperture blade design, which have been shown to produce the type of look that I'm going for. I recently picked up the Voigtlander 21mm F1.4 and 110mm F2.5 for the Sony E-mount along with an adapter to use on my Nikon Z7ii and did 3 separate tests to compare the sunstar rendering and overall look with the two Z lenses.

To emulate a landscape environment where one would expect to start seeing sunstars, I took 4 images of each scene on a tripod from F5.6 to F16 in 1-stop increments. Shutter speed was adjusted to keep the exposure consistent. I picked slightly different locations around my apartment complex for each test, specifically looking for areas with bright points of light that could potentially produce sunstars. The images were exported from Capture One with all adjustments set to 0 aside from sharpening/noise reduction values being set to my current defaults and kelvin/tint values being manually set for consistency (some had a noticeable green/magenta tint). This is my first time trying something like this, so please let me know if I've overlooked some important details.

For all tests, the Nikon image is at the top and the Voigtlander is at the bottom

Test 1: Nikon 14-30mm F4 @21mm vs. Voigtlander 21mm F1.4

Main conclusions from this test:
Nikon 14-30: sunstars don't really appear until F11, but become noticeably larger at F16. The sunstar rays fade as they taper outwards.
Voigtlander 21: sunstars are visible at F5.6 and continue to grow sightly until F16, where the sunstar suddenly loses its defined shape and becomes hazy. There are fewer rays than the Nikon 14-30 at all apertures, and they end in sharp points rather than gradually tapering outwards.

Because the sunstars appear much earlier on the Voigtlander, it's possible to get well-defined sunstars in images before diffraction starts having a noticeable impact on image quality. I consider this a pretty big advantage - looking at some of my previous images taken on the 14-30 where I stopped down to F16 for noticeable sunstars, I can't help but feel like detail and sharpness are lacking, even after post processing. The Voigtlander would've been great to have in those situations.



Feb 19, 2024 at 05:30 AM





  Previous versions of pythonz's message #16475122 « Sunstars: Nikon 14-30 & Nikon 24-120 compared to Voigtlander »

 




This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.