Sigma 56 F1.4 on M6II versus RF 85 F2 on R

Alastair Norcross wrote:

dan the man p wrote:

The thing that stood out to me most was the difference in bokeh. I don't like what PL5 has done with that. Did you dial up the microcontrast?

Good points. I had the microcontrast set to 15, which is my default, and what I thought roughly matches the clarity setting of 25 on LR that I use as a default. But it's entirely possible that the other lens corrections on PL5 mean I just don't need as high a microcontrast setting. I went back and redid one of them (the 56 center shot), lowering the microcontrast to 0, the midtones contrast to -16, and the ClearView Plus setting to 10 (from 20, which is my default, and what I thought roughly corresponds to the dehaze setting of 25 that I use on LR).

So here is the 56 F1.4 center shot again, first LR then DXO:

Now here's the reprocessed DXO version:

And here are the 100% crops from the two DXO versions, to see whether the adjustments to help the bokeh had an adverse effect on detail:

This just goes to show how difficult it is to match settings between processors. It's entirely possible, of course, that the extra detail you get with the DXO lens corrections comes at a price of less pleasant-looking bokeh. But it does seem like there are some things you can do to compensate for that.

Thanks for the samples, Alastair!

I'd agree with your conclusions.

I got the RF 85 F2 IS for the IS so I can shoot handheld at slower shutter speeds

This redo also shows how process settings can make a large difference in how bokeh is rendered. Those first dxo samples looked like bad bokeh but you've been able to re-do the dxo setting to make the bokeh pleasant again like the lightroom rendering.

first time in 20 years I am able to see this impact of processing so thank you again for the work!