Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: RF Native Lens Cropped vs 1.4x vs 2x

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member Fast Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ferndale WA
    Posts
    1,188
    So after messing around with the RAW files I was impressed with what a difference doing basic postprocessing made!

    There was MUCH to much luminance noise reduction, like FAR too much! I completely mushed the details of everything. Used 0 luminance NR and chrominance and 2 color moire. There was a lot of chrominance noise.

    Second thing I did was set it to what I like in the picture style as a base which is lowest contrast highest saturation (Lower the contrast the higher the saturation I need to maintain good saturation). This is my preference for post processing. To each there own no right or wrong here.

    I applied lens corrections including maximum Digital Lens Optimizer. Reduces CA and improves corner sharpness ect.

    Sharpening is pretty fine compared to the standard sharpening setting that was one there, it was REALLY blunt and very good at all. I set it to 1.2 strength, .5 radius, 1 threshold. This is my taste in sharpening, relatively fine and not to strong.

    And of course click white balance correction.

    So, with my taste in postprocessing done, I can see the texture of the paper of both the 2X samples and the native samples! Both are very sharp and very little difference between them. There is FAR more softness in the chart than the differences between the 2X results by themselves. It is more misleading than anything else because of it, we are far exceeding the resolution and sharpness of the chart with both.

    In conclusion the 2X is FAR better than cropping and less than ideal test chart adds a few challenges to get a clear result.

    Native


    2X


    As you can see the 2X after basic post processing is looking far better than previous results, I think what was happing was there was MUCH to much luminance noise reduction and eliminating the fine details of the paper. And having the WB corrected makes it much easier to view sharpness, for me anyway.

    If this was done with ISO 100, good lighting (This lighting is to dark the exposure and enhancing chrominance noise, influencing the results.) and daylight or strobes. So idealy you have zero NR and you are seeing only the sharpness of the lens.

    Also the chart is not very fine at all, a much larger and higher quality chart would make a HUGE difference in seeing the actual sharpness of the lens. Right now I'm using the texture of the paper as a means to help measure sharpness lol. That's pretty darned sharp at that point. But if you even just look at the chart itself and the lines in particular, it is definitely pulling much more detail compared to the native results. And using the full sensor in the process.
    Last edited by Fast Glass; 03-07-2022 at 02:39 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •