carstenw wrote:
Here is another comparison between 50P and 50MP, this time with less difference, and IMO the 50MP shot looks better.
I have also included an f/1.4 shot this time. Surprisingly, there is almost no difference in depth of field, just a touch extra sharpness and less vignetting, the latter of which is the most visible.
I am not sure why the background isn\'t more blurred with the 50P, especially with f/1.4. Perhaps the focus cannot be too far away before this is lost a bit?
Interesting. The difference between the f/1.4 and f/2 shots is really confusing. Nothing seems to be really sharp in the f/2 shot. If you look at the branches at the right side of the frame they are wrapped in haze in the f/2 shot, which is not seen on the f/1.4 shot.
I definitely like the look of the 50P better here. The field curvature of the 50MP is pretty obvious again (affecting the bokeh progressively towards the edges).
Edit: In the second comparison, the 50P is front focused, on the front of the log. The 50MP is backfocused, on the ropes, giving it a slight DOF disadvantage (not sure how significant though). The trend is clear anyway.
@Boris: The CA of the 50P is a bit disappointing. The 50MP looks much cleaner (and a slightly more detailed) and interestingly only shows blue/yellow CA at the right part of the frame, where the 50P shows almost none.
Thanks to both for providing the samples.
Btw, I\'ve heard the suggestion that the Contax 50/1.4 may show less CA. That would be interesting to verify.
carstenw wrote:
Here is another comparison between 50P and 50MP, this time with less difference, and IMO the 50MP shot looks better.
I have also included an f/1.4 shot this time. Surprisingly, there is almost no difference in depth of field, just a touch extra sharpness and less vignetting, the latter of which is the most visible.
I am not sure why the background isn\'t more blurred with the 50P, especially with f/1.4. Perhaps the focus cannot be too far away before this is lost a bit?
Interesting. The difference between the f/1.4 and f/2 shots is really confusing. Nothing seems to be really sharp in the f/2 shot. If you look at the branches at the right side of the frame they are wrapped in haze in the f/2 shot, which is not seen on the f/1.4 shot.
I definitely like the look of the 50P better here. The field curvature of the 50MP is pretty obvious again (affecting the bokeh progressively towards the edges).
Edit: In the second comparison, the 50P is front focused, on the front of the log. The 50MP is backfocused, on the ropes, giving it a slight DOF disadvantage (not sure how significant though). The trend is clear anyway.
@Boris: The CA of the 50P is a bit disappointing. The 50MP looks much cleaner (and a slightly more detailed) and interestingly only shows blue/yellow CA at the right part of the frame, where the 50P shows almost none.
Thanks to both for providing the samples.
Btw, I\'ve heard the suggestion that the Contax 50/1.4 may show less CA. That would be interesting to verify.
carstenw wrote:
Here is another comparison between 50P and 50MP, this time with less difference, and IMO the 50MP shot looks better.
I have also included an f/1.4 shot this time. Surprisingly, there is almost no difference in depth of field, just a touch extra sharpness and less vignetting, the latter of which is the most visible.
I am not sure why the background isn\'t more blurred with the 50P, especially with f/1.4. Perhaps the focus cannot be too far away before this is lost a bit?
Interesting. The difference between the f/1.4 and f/2 shots is really confusing. Nothing seems to be sharp in the f/2 shot. If you look at the branches at the right side of the frame they are wrapped in haze in the f/2 shot, which is not seen on the f/1.4 shot.
I definitely like the look of the 50P better here. The field curvature of the 50MP is pretty obvious again (affecting the bokeh progressively towards the edges).
Edit: In the second comparison, the 50P is front focused, on the front of the log. The 50MP is backfocused, on the ropes, giving it a slight DOF disadvantage (not sure how significant though). The trend is clear anyway.
@Boris: The CA of the 50P is a bit disappointing. The 50MP looks much cleaner (and a slightly more detailed) and interestingly only shows blue/yellow CA at the right part of the frame, where the 50P shows almost none.
Thanks to both for providing the samples.
Btw, I\'ve heard the suggestion that the Contax 50/1.4 may show less CA. That would be interesting to verify.
carstenw wrote:
Here is another comparison between 50P and 50MP, this time with less difference, and IMO the 50MP shot looks better.
I have also included an f/1.4 shot this time. Surprisingly, there is almost no difference in depth of field, just a touch extra sharpness and less vignetting, the latter of which is the most visible.
I am not sure why the background isn\'t more blurred with the 50P, especially with f/1.4. Perhaps the focus cannot be too far away before this is lost a bit?
Interesting. The difference between the f/1.4 and f/2 shots is really confusing. Nothing seems to be sharp in the f/2 shot. If you look at the branches at the right side of the frame they are wrapped in haze in the f/2 shot, which is not seen on the f/1.4 shot.
I definitely like the look of the 50P better here. The field curvature of the 50MP is pretty obvious again (affecting the bokeh progressively towards the edges).
Edit: In the second comparison, the 50P is front focused, on the front of the log. The 50MP is backfocused, on the ropes, giving it a slight DOF disadvantage (not sure how significant though). The trend is clear anyway.
@Boris: The CA of the 50P is a bit disappointing. The 50MP looks much cleaner (and a slightly more detailed) and interestingly only shows blue/yellow CA at the right part of the frame, where the 50P shows almost none.
Thanks to both for providing the samples. I\'ve heard the suggestion that the Contax 50/1.4 may show less CA. That would be interesting to verify.
carstenw wrote:
Here is another comparison between 50P and 50MP, this time with less difference, and IMO the 50MP shot looks better.
I have also included an f/1.4 shot this time. Surprisingly, there is almost no difference in depth of field, just a touch extra sharpness and less vignetting, the latter of which is the most visible.
I am not sure why the background isn\'t more blurred with the 50P, especially with f/1.4. Perhaps the focus cannot be too far away before this is lost a bit?
Interesting. The difference between the f/1.4 and f/2 shots is really confusing. Nothing seems to be sharp in the f/2 shot. If you look at the branches at the right side of the frame they are wrapped in haze in the f/2 shot, which is not seen on the f/1.4 shot.
I definitely like the look of the 50P better here. The field curvature of the 50MP is pretty obvious again (affecting the bokeh progressively towards the edges).
Edit: In the second comparison, the 50P is front focused, on the front of the log. The 50MP is backfocused, on the ropes, giving it a slight DOF disadvantage (not sure how significant though). The trend is clear anyway.
@Boris: The CA of the 50P is a bit disappointing. The 50MP looks much cleaner (and a slightly more detailed) and interestingly only shows blue/yellow CA at the right part of the frame, where the 50P shows almost none.
carstenw wrote:
Here is another comparison between 50P and 50MP, this time with less difference, and IMO the 50MP shot looks better.
I have also included an f/1.4 shot this time. Surprisingly, there is almost no difference in depth of field, just a touch extra sharpness and less vignetting, the latter of which is the most visible.
I am not sure why the background isn\'t more blurred with the 50P, especially with f/1.4. Perhaps the focus cannot be too far away before this is lost a bit?
Interesting. The difference between the f/1.4 and f/2 shots is really confusing. Nothing seems to be sharp in the f/2 shot. If you look at the branches at the right side of the frame they are wrapped in haze in the f/2 shot, which is not seen on the f/1.4 shot.
I definitely like the look of the 50P better here. The field curvature of the 50MP is pretty obvious again (affecting the bokeh progressively towards the edges).
