Used the Nikon 1 for not much more than 1 day

Started Mar 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
stasvolik
Contributing MemberPosts: 567Gear list
Like?
Re: Some parting shots
In reply to Timbukto, Mar 15, 2012

Hi, Timbukto!

Timbukto wrote:

I've already taken shots of flat surfaces to confirm it has soft corners.

Then why do you show the road-and-grass shot as a primary example of this phenomenon? Surely a more controlled test would be a much better way to prove your point.

But even in the sample I've already given do you not see how the softness creeps up the corner and has a circular shape to it in characteristic of typical lens astigmatism?

On the grass and road shot? No, I don't. It does not mean that it's not there - the subject has diagonal lines in grass that may very easily trick the eye into seeing a pattern that's not there.

And you still don't provide an explanation to the fact that you apparently don't see this pattern in all your shots, and point readers to

and

,

saying that the corners in these shots are much better, while failing to explain why. Wouldn't a defective lens show its' deficiencies in all shots?

Once again, I'm not out ot convince you that your conclusions are wrong, I'm only trying to demonstrate that they are not really supported by the data that you've presented in your "Parting shots" posting . If you posted flat-surface shots elsewhere, I would appreciate a link.

That characteristic alone separates it from a DOF issue. There is no significant change in subject distance that accounts for what is clearly astigmatism with a circular characteristic on the corner.

You have not answered neither my question about the AF mode used for the "grass and road" shot, nor my question about your method of making sure that the camera was indeed focused where you think it was focused. So how can you prove this statement?

Had the corners in all my examples been a subject of far greater or lesser distance to the focal point, I would have conceded DOF issue.

Of the 4 corners in this shot two are in the featureless sky and two are in the grass. I assume you're talking about the two in the grass. Well, it all comes back to the fact that without knowledge of where you've focused, there is no way to interpret this shot one way or another.

But I've bought and sold enough lens by now to figure out exactly which is which. I've played the whole PDAF lens buying back/front focus game for long enough to test and understand characteristics of DOF and proper back/front focusing as well as testing for edge sharpness.

These statements, again, beg the question why did you choose such an awful subject as a primary proof of the deficiency of your lens? I'm really flabbergasted...

-- hide signature --

Comments and critiques are always welcome .

Cheers,
Stas.

 stasvolik's gear list:stasvolik's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 5400 Nikon D50 Nikon D300 Nikon 1 J1 Nikon AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow