View previous topic :: View next topic |
Do you post process your images? |
I just resize and sharpen. |
|
2% |
[ 1 ] |
Yes, but only a few basic settings, curves, levels, sharpening++ |
|
41% |
[ 15 ] |
I sometimes do alot of PP |
|
30% |
[ 11 ] |
I shoot RAW and just resize and develop without adjustments |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
No, I shoot jpg and just resize them for web |
|
5% |
[ 2 ] |
I try to do minimum of PP on this forum to present a honest description of lens abilities og character |
|
19% |
[ 7 ] |
|
Total Votes : 36 |
|
Author |
Message |
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010 Posts: 4713 Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 6:56 pm Post subject: About post processing |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
There are different workflows, some people do not apply PP on this forum, others try to give the picture that little extra boost with software.
What is your workflow with legacy lenses?
(If the Poll options don`t fit, make a comment instead) _________________ Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 17633 Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
I would need a chance to give a multiple answer.
x - I sometimes do alot of PP
x - I try to do minimum of PP on this forum to present a honest description of lens abilities og character _________________ Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Depends on which forum images gets posted!
In Galleries and "Best of" forums I use PP to make the image the best it can be. (well I try to do that )
In "Manual Focus Lenses" forum if the goal is to be able to compare lenses, I think images posted need to have as little pp as possible.
A sharpened image does not represent well, the focus or bokeh of the lens. Same with altered image contrast. Images without any Sharpness and Contrast adjustments are much preferred when comparing lenses.
Also important is unaltered levels -- the image should be properly exposed, not corrected in pp.
Resize is usually okay, but also show camera-pixel level "100%" crops, prefer center, & at least one corner.
Before and After pp images would be useful too! _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
Lens performance will be different on different sensors and different image processors ...
For photos which used for lens evaluation, I use the same camera, adjust exposure and WB individually, and keep all other settings the same across all the photos. By doing this, the result will be comparable across the lenses. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SonicScot
Joined: 01 Dec 2011 Posts: 2698 Location: Scottish Highlands
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SonicScot wrote:
I only shoot RAW, so I need to pp every image. _________________ Gary
Currently active gear....
Sony a7
E-M1 Mkll
Rubinar 1000/10 + 2x matched extender
Tamron 500/8 55BB
Sigma 100-300/4
Vivitar Series 1.... 200/3, 70-210/3.5 (V1 by Kiron), 135/2.3, 105/2.5 macro, 90/2.5 macro (Bokina), 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro, 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Carl Zeiss.... 180/2.8, 135/3.5, 85/1.4, 35/2.4 Flektagon, 21/2.8 Distagon
Nikon.... 55/3.5 micro, 50/1.2
Elicar 90/2.5 V-HQ Macro
Zhongyi Speedmaster 85/1.2
Jupiter-9 85/2
Helios.... 58/2 44-3
Hartblei 45/3.5 Super-Rotator TS-PC
Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye
Samyang 8/3.5 fisheye
Nodal Ninja 4, Neewer leveling tripod base
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazsus/ Website http://garianphotography.co.uk/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2201 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
For "casual" shooting (holidays, trips etc.) I try to get the best possible shot in camera. Sometimes it's possible, sometimes not, depending on light conditions. When it's not, I expose thinking on how I will post process the image, so I shoot the image that will give me a better base for pp rather than the best possible exposure (sometimes the two are the same).
Then I almost always shoot raw, so I fiddle with them all when I download the pics, but if a picture is ok out of the camera it's better.
When I do more staged shots (usually it's for video), on the other hand, pp is a fundamental part of the process, and it usually is quite heavy and time consuming. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
SonicScot wrote: |
I only shoot RAW, so I need to pp every image. |
Therein lies the rub!
Does anybody (else) know how to make an unprocessed image from raw data? <-- serious question!!! _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 Posts: 1364 Location: Slovenia
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
SonicScot wrote: |
I only shoot RAW, so I need to pp every image. |
Therein lies the rub!
Does anybody (else) know how to make an unprocessed image from raw data? <-- serious question!!! |
Rawtherapee can do exactly that. Load the raw image, select the [neutral] profile and then go to the raw tab and for demosaicing method select "none". I doubt this is what you really want though. _________________ my flickr stream |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
miran wrote: |
visualopsins wrote: |
SonicScot wrote: |
I only shoot RAW, so I need to pp every image. |
Therein lies the rub!
Does anybody (else) know how to make an unprocessed image from raw data? <-- serious question!!! |
Rawtherapee can do exactly that. Load the raw image, select the [neutral] profile and then go to the raw tab and for demosaicing method select "none". I doubt this is what you really want though. |
Processed a little more than that, I think. Certainly de-mosaic the image so we can see lens(/camera) color balance/tone. No levels, curves, contrast, sharpen. What about color balance? Always use D65 or make constant for all images to compare? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 Posts: 1364 Location: Slovenia
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
Well, then just select the neutral profile. You can select no colour profile as well if you want. Btw, just for the sake of curiosity I made a comparison. Three images: first one is completely raw, second one is converted with absolutely no processing other than demosaicing and colour profile and the third is a normally processed one (exposure, curve, white balance, crop, etc.):
I have a feeling most people don't really know what they're talking about when they say "unprocessed photo". _________________ my flickr stream |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
miran wrote: |
Well, then just select the neutral profile. You can select no colour profile as well if you want. Btw, just for the sake of curiosity I made a comparison. Three images: first one is completely raw, second one is converted with absolutely no processing other than demosaicing and colour profile and the third is a normally processed one (exposure, curve, white balance, crop, etc.):
photo
I have a feeling most people don't really know what they're talking about when they say "unprocessed photo". |
We have a winner!
That is the unprocessed photo I'm talking about. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
TAo2
Joined: 09 Mar 2012 Posts: 319 Location: Scotland
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
TAo2 wrote:
Surely an "unprocessed" raw would simply be 1s and 0s... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
My post processing ranges from resizing only to a heavy amount of pp. It all depends on the photo and/or the situation. If I'm doing a lens test, for example, and I want to post the results at a forum such as this one, then typically all I'll do is resize the images. But if I'm after getting the maximum "look" from an image, then I'll pull out all the stops.
I have found from experience that, if I do a lot of pp to an image, often when I look at it the next day, I won't like it at all because it looks like too much was done to it. So I'll redo it, scaling things down some. If it still looks good the next day, then it's probably a keeper. I've found this "cooling off period" to be very important when it comes to the final appearance of an image. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 Posts: 1364 Location: Slovenia
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
TAo2 wrote: |
Surely an "unprocessed" raw would simply be 1s and 0s... |
Exactly!
Or something like this:
I'm now tempted to post an image like this every time someone complains that a particular photo is not good because it's processed and they demand to see the "original" as it came out of the camera. _________________ my flickr stream |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
miran wrote: |
TAo2 wrote: |
Surely an "unprocessed" raw would simply be 1s and 0s... |
Exactly!
Or something like this:
[hexadecimal dump]
I'm now tempted to post an image like this every time someone complains that a particular photo is not good because it's processed and they demand to see the "original" as it came out of the camera. |
Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
SonicScot
Joined: 01 Dec 2011 Posts: 2698 Location: Scottish Highlands
|
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
SonicScot wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP. |
+1 _________________ Gary
Currently active gear....
Sony a7
E-M1 Mkll
Rubinar 1000/10 + 2x matched extender
Tamron 500/8 55BB
Sigma 100-300/4
Vivitar Series 1.... 200/3, 70-210/3.5 (V1 by Kiron), 135/2.3, 105/2.5 macro, 90/2.5 macro (Bokina), 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro, 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Carl Zeiss.... 180/2.8, 135/3.5, 85/1.4, 35/2.4 Flektagon, 21/2.8 Distagon
Nikon.... 55/3.5 micro, 50/1.2
Elicar 90/2.5 V-HQ Macro
Zhongyi Speedmaster 85/1.2
Jupiter-9 85/2
Helios.... 58/2 44-3
Hartblei 45/3.5 Super-Rotator TS-PC
Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye
Samyang 8/3.5 fisheye
Nodal Ninja 4, Neewer leveling tripod base
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazsus/ Website http://garianphotography.co.uk/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vroger
Joined: 23 Jul 2014 Posts: 623 Location: MN
Expire: 2016-10-21
|
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vroger wrote:
I shoot raw, I normally show a before and after if it's about a lens on the manual lens forum to show what it looks like before processing, and then to show how good a image can look from the lens. Personally, I think that is important. _________________ Roger Lund
Canon EOS-M, Fuji X-E2, Helois 44-0 Vintage, Helois 44-4, Canon FD 50mm 1.8, Jupiter 8 50mm F2, Jupiter 3 50mm F1.5, Canon Serenar 50mm 1.9, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM, Canon Serenar 85mm F2, Leica 50mm f2 summar, E.Ludwig 50mm F2.9, Rekagon will.wetzlar 50mm 2.8,, a.schacht ulm travenar 135mm F3.5, CZJ 29mm 2.8 Hoya 28mm 2.8, CZ Tessar 50mm 2.8, MIR 37mm. 2.8, Porst Color Reflex MC 50mm 1.7, Vivitar 28mm 2.8 mc cf
http://photography.rogerlund.net
For sale: Canon EOS-M and MF Adapters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
+1 vroger
For lens comparisons, and in a forum dedicated to lens comparisons, use unprocessed images.
For lens showcase, use PP to get the very best from image lens produces. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP. |
Yes, this is what I always do when I'm posting images from different lenses as comparisons. Otherwise, there is no point. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
visualopsins wrote: |
Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP. |
Yes, this is what I always do when I'm posting images from different lenses as comparisons. Otherwise, there is no point. |
edit: Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP or in the camera. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
cooltouch wrote: |
visualopsins wrote: |
Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP. |
Yes, this is what I always do when I'm posting images from different lenses as comparisons. Otherwise, there is no point. |
edit: Somebody posts images from two different lenses to show differences in sharpness. The point here is they shouldn't sharpen those images in PP or in the camera. |
Yeah, I know what you mean. With my EOS DSLR, I was able to set sharpness in the camera, or sharpen the raw image before translating. My view on that was, if the camera caught the detail, then the detail should be expressed. But there were limits. Too much sharpness tweaking produced undesirable artifacts, so even with this capability, I had to exercise restraint. I found with that camera, that even when I set things rather conservatively, the image always looked better when viewed at 80% rather than 100%. That's frustrating.
But if I was using the same camera and the same settings for the lens comparison, then they're both being judged by the same yardstick, so it doesn't matter.
Now, with my NEX, I have not found any internal sharpness settings in its menu selections, and the raw file translation utility I use has no sharpening function, so with the NEX, there is no post-image capture sharpening done at all when I'm doing lens comparisons. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2015 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
...
But if I was using the same camera and the same settings for the lens comparison, then they're both being judged by the same yardstick, so it doesn't matter.
... |
Well, not exactly...this is incorrect imho...suppose one lens results are easier to sharpen? In any case, in the camera sharpening is done using similar algorithms to PP sharpening -- how is it that PP sharpening is not okay while in-camera is okay?! When comparing sharpness, images should not be sharpened in camera or PP, correct? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2015 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
You need to go back and reread what I wrote before the sentence you quoted. If I set the in-camera sharpness to a certain value, then both lenses are being subject to the same algorithm, so I don't see how it matters. If I leave the sharpness setting to its default value, how is that any different from applying sharpness to the image? It isn't. It's just a different value. So, however you want to look at it, you can't escape the fact that a sharpness utility is being applied to the image.
Anyway, it has been my experience that if critical focus is achieved with a lens, using a sharpening utility only results in adding noise and artifacts to the image. It doesn't get any sharper. So there's no point in using an external sharpening utility. All the in-camera sharpening function is doing, imo, is making sure the image is being displayed with a maximum level of sharpness before it becomes degraded.
With that EOS, I found that I could tweak the camera's sharpness setting upward a moderate amount without the images suffering degradation from artifacts. That camera defaulted to a setting of 3 out of a possible 7. 3 is dull, dull, dull. Quite soft. It usually required that I sharpen the image in Canon's DPP raw conversion utility. I found that if I set the in-camera sharpness to 5, the images are not adversely affected, and I don't have to sharpen them in DPP.
But that was the EOS, which isn't getting used much anymore. Now I'm shooting with the NEX 7, which doesn't have an internal sharpness setting. I usually don't use the Image Data Converter software that came with the NEX, which does have a sharpness control and which behaves similar to unsharp masking. Instead I use the raw utility built into Paint Shop Pro VII, my preferred image processing software, and its raw converter doesn't have a sharpness tool. So when you see lens comparison images that I've taken with my NEX, you can be assured that no sharpening was done to them. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4748 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2015 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
None of the answers reflect what I do. Just basic levels and crop. NEVER sharpening. _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10541 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
... set the in-camera sharpness to a certain value, then both lenses are being subject to the same algorithm, so I don't see how it matters. If I leave the sharpness setting to its default value, how is that any different from applying sharpness to the image? It isn't. It's just a different value. So, however you want to look at it, you can't escape the fact that a sharpness utility is being applied to the image.
... |
Suppose the algorithm works better on one image...that image will appear sharper, yes? Non-zero sharpening matters because the image gets changed. Zero sharpening, in camera or PP, does not make any sharpness corrections to image.
cooltouch wrote: |
... All the in-camera sharpening function is doing, imo, is making sure the image is being displayed with a maximum level of sharpness before it becomes degraded. ... |
Using internal software sharpening algorithms, if sharpness setting is non-zero, yes? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|