LX7 awful edge resolution due to distortion correction

Started Apr 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP Shirozina Regular Member • Posts: 457
Re: LX7 awful edge resolution due to distortion correction

Detail Man wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

Just 'upgraded' from an LX5 to an LX7 and noticed very poor edge resolution at wide settings using RAW developed in ACR - worse than the LX5. When processing them in Capture one where you can turn off the distortion correction you can see why - the native lens distortion is absolutely horrendous and at the wide end it looks like a fisheye lens. All that loss of resolution is solely from the distortion correction stretching the edges of the image back into shape and looking at the undistorted image the resolution is superb right into the corners.

The last image had some noise reduction applied to the processed image so here it is without and also the thumbnail showing what the distortion correction is actually doing.

The rectilinear distrortion corrected one (here the lower image) does look pretty bad - though you have here displayed it at a higher magnification (which is bound to make the upper one look better). I take it that it looks as bad using LR as it does using C1 ? The Imaging Resource reviews state the following uncorrected RAW full wide-angle (24mm) distortion percentages:

LX7 (4.0%):


LX5 (2.7%):


LX3 (2.9%):

The inter-camera differences in barrel distortion do not appear to be very significant. Perhaps there is (somehow) something else going on ? The following are just ideas, just thoughts ...

Where you using the physically widest utilization of image-sensor photosites (16:9 aspect-ratio) ? Is the effect equal in the right-hand sections of your images ?

A fair number of LX5's had an asymmetrical softness effect that would often (but not always) manifest around the left-hand edges/corners.

You (might) have a defective lens ? The image-file meta-data driving your RAW processor corrections generates statistical correction data (which is not based on individual lens tests).

Yes, I know that you find the the uncorrected versions looking better - but without a closer look at equal (and higher) magnifications it is hard to discern a lot from your example images.

DM ...

Both images are at 100% magnification - the top one looks bigger due to the image being stretched and thus resampled / upressed during the distortion correction process which is what the issue I have is. It needs so much that it destroys image detail. Look at the thumbnail lower left to see the huge pincushion shape needed to create the lower corrected image. They were taken at 16:9 and the effect is equal both sides. Image stabiliser was off which I know on the LX5 can give one edge a softer look than the other.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow