• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Lens corrections equivalent to audio corrections when possible

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
Like I said blinded test - you can afford one if you move to Richmond
 

paulraphael

Active Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2020
Messages
262
Likes
367
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Do you have much experience with the special rendering of certain Leica lenses?
....


https://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/

That article is filled with reams of the photo equivalent of audiophile word-salad.

Statements like "A magnitude of micro-contrast is inversely proportionate to the number of optical elements in the lens." is like saying "audio detail increases exponentially with the onyx content of your amplifier support cones."

There's nothing about detail and contrast that can't be quantified with fantastic precision by an MTF curve (the optical equivalent of frequency response, but related to image spatial frequency). There is no relationship between number of elements and any modulation value. And Zeiss is not a company that shies away from using many elements if a design calls for it.

There's also the matter of Leica / Zeiss lenses using a wide variety of different lens designs, throughout history and at any given period. You'd find all different shapes of MTF curve, all different degrees of spherical aberration correction, all different kinds of flare qualities.

One thing that can be kind of consistent in distinguishing one brand over another is overall color cast. But this has always been infinitesimally subtle—more measurable than visible. These differences are dwarfed by differences in film stocks, sensors, and processing.

I did a fairly systematic blind lens comparison with a bunch of other large format photographers several years ago. We were doing something that should have been a lot easier than, say, distinguishing Leica from Nikon. We were comparing modern Rodenstock multicoated lenses with very simple, single-coated lenses by companies like Goerz and Kodak that were decades old. In many cases no one could tell the difference when all the other variables were held constant.

The differences between these lenses would have been obvious if measured on an optical bench, but in real-life images they were dwarfed issues like depth-of field, diffraction, blur from vibration and wind, etc.

We were not looking at bokeh, but all of us had enough experience to know that this is a lens-by-lens consideration, not something where any company is consistent across models and focal lengths (cinema lenses being an exception here ... that's one of the things you're paying for).
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
I know, I was tongue-in-cheek anyway.

I quite like my Fuji X-Pro2 with the XF primes. Nowadays, it is hard to do travel photography. So I am using my phone mostly.

People with Fuji really love Fuji - is it the ergonomics?
 

Soniclife

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,500
Likes
5,417
Location
UK
In some circumstances the photos taken with them can easily be distinguished - in a blinded testing.
Different lenses do indeed look different, the optical recipes are slightly comparable to different types of speakers, sort of.

A while ago I used to look at pictures in websites where the same composition was taken with different lenses, sometimes also different cameras, but they were not labeled when first published so you didn't know what you are looking at. Without the price tag being known the comments were all over the place, until the reveal, when quite a few felt the need to clarify what they said. I often preferred the cheaper lens, but not always, some of the pricy lens had too much going on in the out of focus areas, they were distracting to me. As with most things not knowing the answer makes for more honest appraisal.
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
people have done blinded tests and some of the Leica photos are clearly different

I can see clear differences on my PannyLeica lens photos too

as to why, that is another matter
 

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,082
Likes
8,917
I hear a lot about micro contrast and color rendition.
 

Freeway

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2021
Messages
325
Likes
379
People with Fuji really love Fuji - is it the ergonomics?

The old world analog style exposure controls. Aperture ring on lens, shutter speed and ISO dials on body.
Highly regarded Jpeg engine. Fuji's color science (Fuji flavour) is a calling card. Many believe the first generation X series, XP1 XE1, is still the best.
Their film simulations are a big hit.
Fuji's IQ is the same throughout the price range. Same sensors.
X-trans sensors are a niche thing. First manufacturer to drop the anti-aliasing filter.
Make very fine lenses.
 

paulraphael

Active Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2020
Messages
262
Likes
367
Location
Brooklyn, NY
people have done blinded tests and some of the Leica photos are clearly different

I can see clear differences on my PannyLeica lens photos too

as to why, that is another matter

I'd like to see this done with some rigor. Luckily, it's a whole lot easier with pictures than with sound.

Some individual lenses have a very distinct look in the out-of-focus areas. So I don't doubt that in images with plenty of defocus, you could in many cases distinguish lens A from lens B. And some lenses are going to have different / worse aberrations than others, which will be visible if you look at high enough magnification at the edges and corners.

But this is very different from saying Brand A lenses look like this, Brand B lenses look like that. I'd bet against this claim any day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wes
OP
Frank Dernie

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,781
Location
Oxfordshire
I'd like to see this done with some rigor. Luckily, it's a whole lot easier with pictures than with sound.

Some individual lenses have a very distinct look in the out-of-focus areas. So I don't doubt that in images with plenty of defocus, you could in many cases distinguish lens A from lens B. And some lenses are going to have different / worse aberrations than others, which will be visible if you look at high enough magnification at the edges and corners.

But this is very different from saying Brand A lenses look like this, Brand B lenses look like that. I'd bet against this claim any day.
I agree that lumping all makes of lens together to a particular look is unlikely, it tends to be particular families of designs "back in the day" had similar looks but now more likely to be just particular lenses.
For me the biggest difference between the different lenses I own, and I admit my interest is more the equipment not the photography in contrast with my interest in HiFi, is in the quality of manufacture and things like flare resistance and the look of the out of focus areas.
For landscape photography sharpness and depth of field requirements mean there are hopefully no out of focus areas but flare resistance is still important.
The Leica lenses I used to own turned out to be a good investment, I had both the 50mm f1.2 Noctilux and the original 35mm f1.4 aspherical which I had good use from over the decades and both sold for over £10,000. The former was OK the latter absolutely superb.

Anyway, over the last 60 years I have taken photographs with lots of lenses and the ones where the picture was technically impressive were from several makers, Leica, Zeiss and Fuji particularly.
Canon telephotos have been spectacular but the wides were so poor to mediocre I actually stopped using Canon altogether, though I kept the favourite lenses, 500mm f4 and 85mm f1.2 and have an adapter for a different camera. Both these have boke to equal or better any Leica lens I use.
I could go on (and on!) but it still seems to me that flare resistance is a very important parameter one never sees measured and for those who like using fast lenses boke too.
Sharpness is easily measured and for 10x8 prints almost every lens I have used is sharp enough.
 

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
I think we all take the number crunching capability of even not at all modern computers for granted when it comes to analytical work. Tasks which once represented huge analytical challenges are now just routine tasks which can be done in next to no time.
 

PierreV

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,437
Likes
4,686
I think we all take the number crunching capability of even not at all modern computers for granted when it comes to analytical work. Tasks which once represented huge analytical challenges are now just routine tasks which can be done in next to no time.
Yes, it's just insane. Just this morning I wrote a small program to play with skimage wavelet denoising using 62 megapixels images. Launched the program and was planning to grab a cup of coffee while it worked. I did not even have the time to stand from my chair that the result was displayed. Almost 40 years ago, I would have been watching the Mandelbrodt set appear line by line on an CGA display... Boy, I do feel old today!
 

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
Yes, it's just insane. Just this morning I wrote a small program to play with skimage wavelet denoising using 62 megapixels images. Launched the program and was planning to grab a cup of coffee while it worked. I did not even have the time to stand from my chair that the result was displayed. Almost 40 years ago, I would have been watching the Mandelbrodt set appear line by line on an CGA display... Boy, I do feel old today!
I used to do torsional vibration analysis, before my time my colleagues told me they'd enter the input data from the mass - elastic model and then it would be done overnight on an old main frame ready to be checked in the morning. And if they made a mistake in the data entry it was a 24 hour delay as it would have to be corrected and re-run the following night, Now we hit the enter key and the results appear pretty much instantaneously. And with FEA modelling we have so much more granularity and so much more capability to analyse and optimise performance. Even developing mass elastic models is now a pretty simple exercise using tools like mathcad. That said my employer required us to do the mass elastic modelling long hand a minimum number of times a year to maintain familiarity with the underlying principles and to stop people becoming just keyboard operators. Initially I thought that a pain in the backside, but it does make sense as it was not unusual for someone to spend hours chasing their tale for hours because of an error in the modelling which would have been pretty obvious if they'd thought about the raw data rather than just punching it all into mathcad. And I'll hasten to add I have been there myself. Doing these things long hand does help people to recognise problems with the data, which can be followed up with a phone call or a check and save a lot of time and stress.
 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,169
Likes
3,717
Ugh, enough of comparisons to video/photo to audio. Not comparable! Totally different sensory mechanisms and different tech (until we get to AI where everything is just training)

(Also, elsewhere but all around this forum: cars analogized to audio gear: Just stop. It's stupid.)
 

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,869
Likes
5,955
People with Fuji really love Fuji - is it the ergonomics?
They are like the Topping of the industry, except it’s made in Japan.

Very high performance optics and cameras at affordable pricing. True whether looking at APS-C or 33x44 MF.

They also combine technical accuracy along with options for “film simulation” which is stylistic colorization.
 

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
I must admit, I like the Fuji classic film simulation feature.
 

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40
There's no real comparison of audio and photography. One is consuming someone else's art via a bunch of electronics and transducers, the other is capturing light in some way to create an image.

If there were comparisons to be drawn, its the way in which some invest in the hardware. In both cases, better gear doesn't automatically mean better results, there are variables at play.

So far as bokeh goes, Minolta created the 135 STF, a specialist bokeh monster, later reincarnated by Sony. It's a technical thing to use, results are said to be exemplary.

135 STF

Lens selection is quite a deliberate choice to create the image in the way you want. The same camera body can be used to render an image clinically sharp and free of optical defects if you wish, or with all the charm of a vintage lens if thats what you desire. Horses for courses.

Speaking of bokeh and sharpness, behold results from the Minolta 500 Reflex. It's quite an interesting optic.

_DSC0822.jpg
 
Top Bottom