Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, Sony really seems to have worked some magic with the C3/5N sensor edges...unless it's just a firmware trick.Wow the C3 does better with the 18 than the M9, to my eye.
Yeah, unless the sensor can somehow detect the amount of shift and correct accordingly, but that's a long shot.It can't be a firmware trick because, with legacy glass, the NEX won't know which lens is mounted and the vigneting is specific for each lens - i.e a ZM18 will have much more color cast in the edges than a ZM35.
Most Leica M lenses are coded and the camera applies the correct profile for each lens. Nevertheless, a fullframe sensor is more demanding than APS-C and we see from the examples of the former page that a M9 with a non-coded lens performs worse than a NEX-5N, regarding purple edges.
The leicas use a coding system on each lens, there are no electronic contacts used. But you can also set the lens on the body. The firmware could allow you to select from presets.It can't be a firmware trick because, with legacy glass, the NEX won't know which lens is mounted and the vigneting is specific for each lens - i.e a ZM18 will have much more color cast in the edges than a ZM35.
Most Leica M lenses are coded and the camera applies the correct profile for each lens. Nevertheless, a fullframe sensor is more demanding than APS-C and we see from the examples of the former page that a M9 with a non-coded lens performs worse than a NEX-5N, regarding purple edges.
--You are correct. I owned a M6 for many years and purchased a M7 just before the digital thing really got going. Leica glass was so much cheaper back then and really good Leica glass can cost $5000 a piece.
I am glad I bought all of my new Leica glass when the M8 first came out as year or two later it all started to skyrocket!
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
Where are you getting that? The really horrible example is from the notorius cv 15, which requires cornerfix on the M9. And in that shot it looks very much like Rock has focused past inifinity, since the center is suspiciously softer than the other samples--or at least it seemed that way to me.The samples from the 7 are much worse than the ones from the old 5 for example.
cheers
paul
I'm a little concerned about the detail in the top corners of his NEX-7 photo with the Zm 35/2 at f4: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/6231917737/sizes/o/in/photostream/here is the 5n fuzzing out on the edges with the contax 28
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8399398@N06/6284252934/in/pool-nex5n
but it seems great in lots of others with heliar wides
and in rob's shots the 18 and 21 are better than the 25 or 28 on the edges--or it seems to me they are. At f/8
Since the sensors peak at f/4 shame he didn't do many there.
6000x it's like the hubble![]()
That's a strange start. Further down the thread you seem to know everything?I'm waiting on a NEX7 and I really don't understand why it matters if third party glass works on the NEX bodies.
(...)
I was referring to Steve Huffs photos specifically. I did ask on another thread to see if there were more CV/wide samples.Where are you getting that? The really horrible example is from the notorius cv 15, which requires cornerfix on the M9. And in that shot it looks very much like Rock has focused past inifinity, since the center is suspiciously softer than the other samples--or at least it seemed that way to me.
Paul,Also to my mind if there is colour fringing then the sharpness of those areas would also be affected. It's a physical light interaction thing...
I'm a little concerned about the detail in the top corners of his NEX-7 photo with the Zm 35/2 at f4: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/6231917737/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Either way, if the NEX-7 is only as good as the NEX-5 in the corners, I'll have to bite the bullet and go NEX-5N.
--Yeah, unless the sensor can somehow detect the amount of shift and correct accordingly, but that's a long shot.It can't be a firmware trick because, with legacy glass, the NEX won't know which lens is mounted and the vigneting is specific for each lens - i.e a ZM18 will have much more color cast in the edges than a ZM35.
Most Leica M lenses are coded and the camera applies the correct profile for each lens. Nevertheless, a fullframe sensor is more demanding than APS-C and we see from the examples of the former page that a M9 with a non-coded lens performs worse than a NEX-5N, regarding purple edges.
The most interesting thing to me about those M9 shots is, even if you crop out an aps-c portion out of the non-coded M9 samples, the NEX-3C still comes out ahead, so, at least in terms of color shift, the NEX-C3's micro lenses may actually be better tuned than the M9's.
The really cool solution would be a firmware update that allows you to shoot a grey card (or white card) and create an in-camera vignetting/color-shift correction profile from that result. Ideally, the camera would allow you to tag and store quite a few of these profiles, rather than making you re-shoot the card each time you switch lenses.
This should be possible to do in-camera, as it's what CornerFix does OOC, but whether it's work that Sony is interested in taking on....?
--Yeah, unless the sensor can somehow detect the amount of shift and correct accordingly, but that's a long shot.It can't be a firmware trick because, with legacy glass, the NEX won't know which lens is mounted and the vigneting is specific for each lens - i.e a ZM18 will have much more color cast in the edges than a ZM35.
Most Leica M lenses are coded and the camera applies the correct profile for each lens. Nevertheless, a fullframe sensor is more demanding than APS-C and we see from the examples of the former page that a M9 with a non-coded lens performs worse than a NEX-5N, regarding purple edges.
The most interesting thing to me about those M9 shots is, even if you crop out an aps-c portion out of the non-coded M9 samples, the NEX-3C still comes out ahead, so, at least in terms of color shift, the NEX-C3's micro lenses may actually be better tuned than the M9's.
Nex-5 with kit lenses, Contax G 35, and a number of legacy lenses (mostly Canon FD)
There isn't much of a penalty by optimizing micro lenses for short registration distances. Maybe a bit more vignetting on telephotos, but nothing much to worry about. However, forum member Agorabasta doesn't believe that it's a microlens change at all. He claims that Sony sensors often have a small gap in between the filter pack and sensor, in order to aid in not seeing dust on the sensor, and Sony could have just removed that gap on the C3/5N. Who knows?It hard to believe the 5n does this 100% in the sensor and the firmware plays no part. This would imply the sensor is optimised for very short registers---unless it somehow is just sensitive to all light angles. But up to now it seems in general sensors have been tuned for optimal results from a given register.
Now the 16mm rear element is closer to the sensor than my CV 21mm. Did Sony really just forget about performance with their native 16 on the Nex-7?
I see the 5n still has softness deep in the corners on the 16
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2416images/6236018517/sizes/o/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bairid/6219253894/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Do we find these far worse than Rob's 16 samples?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphotorob/6232002288/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Look at the grass in the foreground. Looks nearly the same as the 5n, no?