Forum Replies Created
Thank you Richard for the feedback. How is the distortion correction at major focal lengths? Not asking for perfection, but wondering if they can be corrected easily (i.e. no mustache shaped distortion) in post.
Thanks!
I saw this post in another thread. It makes sense to me.
http://www.reddotforum.com/showthread.php/694-S2-and-HTS-1.5The benefit of a shift lens is you get 2 focal lengths out of 1 lens when you consider shift and stitch to get a wider view. The 1.5x factor destroys that added benefit. I suppose you have to limit the imaging circle coverage to make room for tilt and shift.
Alex AR;4444 wrote: Does the TS adaptor really work on the Leica S with the Hasselblad adaptor? I think I read somewhere that it doesn't… but now insecure. Has anybody tested it? I guess adaptor on adaptor may have problems with the communications.
Hi Andyc,
I am still not giving up on the Leica S and the zoom lens idea yet. I am willing to take the time to custom “warp” extreme cases even after lens correction settings. Do you mind shooting a brick wall for a quick reference at the major focal length stops? It can be handheld, doesn't have to be super sharp, even if not perfectly square to the wall face, small jpg files. I am still wanting to test tweak them to see if I can live with it. I am putting up with the 16-35 at the moment so maybe 30-90 zoom I can accept as well. I will be forever grateful for your help in this $10,000 question…Steve
Thanks guys for your feedback. Life is filled with tough choices – convenience vs. perfection. Yes Hassy H on TS for the S is a good option indeed. The 1.5x factor is a little annoying and they are not S lenses though. Do you think at the smaller aperture the lens quality gap is less between H and S?
Thanks and I did compare them already. The 30mm seems to be slightly better as a prime. It is S shaped and I was just wondering if it can be corrected easily. The only way is to see a real lens shooting grids at this point for an easy answer. I did contact Leica and seemed to get no answer.
Through experience my Nikon 17-35 f2.8 was so horrible for interior work. I ended up with the 16-35 f4 to get better result but still there is parabolic shape sometimes… I only dare to use my PC-E with lines near edges at the moment.
Josh Lehrer;4435 wrote: I have not had the chance to test this myself but Leica Camera offers very thorough lens data documents on their downloads page (at the bottom):
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/en/DOWNLOADS
The documents include distortion charts, among other things, and you could compare the distortion of the 30-90mm to the fixed focal length lenses too!
Thanks so much for your insight. Yes I am more curious about getting the most out of it than saving bad exposures. I am used to bracketing and merging files with my current small format and have seen some samples of an IQ260 with 13 stops dynamic range. The photographer showed me 100% view of an interior mall storefronts where light and shadows exist everywhere. It was quite impressive. Good to know about 12 stops is satisfactory for you. Yes the upgrade is about the same. I am hoping for the 30mm TS lens to be true.
Josh Lehrer;4434 wrote: I find the dynamic range of the S sensor to be all that I really need, I couldn't really quantify it because I don't believe that measurement ever really means anything. I will say that I don't have any difficulty recovering highlights that are 2+ stops over exposed, but I rarely attempt to recover extremely deep shadows because that's always where noise lives on any sensor.
When it comes to the dynamic range of any sensor, it's important to me not because I want to recover improperly exposed images, but to extract as much detail as possible out of my properly exposed files. In those scenarios I often find that I can process my S raw files multiple times to create an extended dynamic range image from just one file.
And it's not hard to upgrade your S camera…just sell it and buy the next one! It's the same thing users of other systems do when new bodies and backs come out.
How is the dynamic range? I am intrigued by the large dynamic range in MF but also a little scared to commit to a body and sensor that cannot be upgraded. Do you forsee benefit of more dynamic range? Have you done a 3 stop over and under test to see if you can get the detail back? Would appreciate your thoughts.
Steve
Josh Lehrer;4274 wrote: Alain:
I haven't taken the S out for serious landscape photography yet but I do have a number of DNG files of non-portraits that I would be happy to send to you via DropBox or a similar service. Send me an email at [email]josh@dalephotoanddigital.com[/email] and we can arrange it.
Hi there, I am considering Leica S strongly due to the existence of this lens. I shoot interior so distortion is very important to me as well. Is there any chance you can shoot a grid at the major focal lengths you listed below and post samples or see if you can get it to true rectlinear by the lens correction adjustment slider in ACR / Lightroom? I would typically shoot mid to long distance with mid aperture (f16 in this case maybe?)
I compared the MTF between this zoom and the equivalent primes but a chart is not as good as a real test.
There aren't many samples around for some of us to do this test. If you could help I will be very very grateful.
Steve
andyc;4066 wrote: Hi
I have just checked and we get the following
30=3.5
45=4.3
60=4.9
75=5.3
90=5.6this is normal variation pro rata
hope this is useful for you
Andy:)
