/p/ - Photography » Thread #2974171

[18 / 5 / ?]

1MiB, 1200x689, smudge.jpg

Megapixels? Move to Full-Frame?

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:40:03 No.2974171 View View Reply Original Report

So I'm currently shooting an old Nikkor 20mm 2.8 AF on an m4/3 Olympus OMD E-M10. I noticed for landscape shots, the images tend to smudge and blur, especially in pic-related near the field and grass/brush. The effect is somewhat less noticeable in the leaves of the trees. But it seems I'm not able to pull enough detail as I would like from my landscapes. Is this a sensor issue or a lens issue? How do I fix it? I'm considering moving to a D610 so I have autofocus capability, but would like to avoid spending money if possible.

>inb4 sony shills
>inb4 mirrorless shitposting

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:46:10 No.2974173 Report

Quoted By: >>2974178

>>2974171
It'd be the lens. It's hard to tell without a 100% crop of a side but have you tried "Remove Chromatic Aberrations" in Lightroom / ACR? Have you tried a smaller or wider aperture? Try some test shots at different apertures, see if it changes.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PB250029-2.jpg, 5MiB, 2550x1465

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:46:19 No.2974174 Report

Quoted By: >>2974176

>>2974171
Don't know if the resolution I post is relevant, but here's a 5MB file.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:48:29 No.2974176 Report

Quoted By: >>2974181 >>2974185

>>2974174
Ah yeah, just shoot raw and when you import it to Photoshop just enable "Remove Chromatic Aberrations" and most of your problems will go away.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PB250029-3.jpg, 1MiB, 1112x936

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:49:51 No.2974178 Report

Quoted By: >>2974189

>>2974173
Here's a crop, not 100% though. I have removed chromatic aberrations, and I've tried a variety of apertures. I don't think it's due to diffractions, this was shot at f/8

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:50:58 No.2974181 Report

Quoted By:

>>2974176
Oh, wait, really? I thought I had been removing the chromatic aberrations in Lightroom by selecting the purple and green hues? I have been shooting raw, though

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO test.png, 899KiB, 1167x440

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 04:55:02 No.2974185 Report

Quoted By: >>2974190

>>2974176
this is what I've been doing. Is this not sufficient?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:00:13 No.2974189 Report

Quoted By: >>2974192 >>2974196

>>2974178
Jeez, it didn't do a great job detecting and removing them. They're still lit up with red and cyan. Did you shoot raw and use Remove Chromatic Aberration or did you shoot jpeg and do it?

You may have to use the lens correction filter in Photoshop to remove it, that'll be fun.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:01:41 No.2974190 Report

Quoted By: >>2974196

>>2974185
Try turning off profile corrections; it may be for a different sensor size.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PB250029_PS_CA.jpg, 277KiB, 544x489

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:02:32 No.2974192 Report

Quoted By:

>>2974189
Here's the raw directly to Photoshop and the lens profile settings applied.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:05:05 No.2974196 Report

Quoted By: >>2974198

>>2974190
>>2974189
Putting the original RAW through Photoshop and selecting the lens profile and removing chromatic aberrations removed the red and cyan hues entirely. I tried turning the profile corrections on and off, but the grass still looks smudge. Should I try uploading the original raw file?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:09:03 No.2974198 Report

Quoted By: >>2974201

>>2974196
Nah, I wouldn't do anything different if I had the raw. It may just be a soft lens, nothing wrong with that.

At least the chromabs are gone, looks a lot better. If it's really bothering you could try a 2 or 3 pixel smart sharpen set to gaussian with a low intensity and see if that makes it look a little less soft. There are filters dedicated to compensating for lens softness but they've got a price tag, specifically Topaz Lens Effects, so I'd try smart sharpen first.

Final thing, probably silly but just in case you overlooked it, have you tried cleaning the lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:14:26 No.2974201 Report

Quoted By:

>>2974198
The smudging drives me crazy for all my landscape shots. I haven't tried too many lenses. The equipment I have is pretty old. There's not any visible signs of internal dust or hazing, maybe a light scratch here and there. I've wiped them down nicely and cleanly, so I'm not sure if that's the case.

I'll give the smart sharpen a try.

So you wouldn't say it's a M4/3 sensor issue? Lens-oriented? I was considering upgrading for the holidays, but if sensor size isn't the issue, I'll look into buying better glass.

Thanks a ton by the way.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:14:58 No.2974202 Report

Quoted By: >>2974207

Some lenses aren't good at near-to-infinity sharpness. It's just one of those unwritten, undocumented special characteristics of lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 05:34:50 No.2974207 Report

Quoted By: >>2974242

>>2974202
So would I have the same problem regardless of whether or not I got a new camera if I used the same lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 06:12:39 No.2974215 Report

Quoted By: >>2974527

OP, some of the smudging could come from the overaggressive noise reduction smaller sensors tend to use, even at low ISOs. I get the same garbage in areas of fine detail like that with my X20 which has an even smaller sensor. Even in raw a lot of cameras have some noise reduction that can't be completely disabled and it seems like something more egregious with sub-APS sensor sizes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 07:14:07 No.2974242 Report

Quoted By: >>2974527

>>2974207
Nope, full frame will be much sharper. If you got a ff camera with same megapixel count, the lens would need to be 4 times sharper on the m43 to compensate for the tiny sensor and its impossibly tiny pixels.

Just look at the difference between 135 and medium format, that's a comparable sensor size jump.

Personally I'd recommend the second generation sony a7 range, it's ergonomically similar to your oly, but a bit beefier, and the customisation options and ibis make it a really powerful tool for any situation.

Remember your 20mm nikkor will now look like a 20mm lens should when you put it on ff, so if you want a similar fov look at getting a 35 or 50.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Nov 2016 17:40:10 No.2974527 Report

Quoted By:

>>2974242
>>2974215
Noted. Thanks, really appreciate it, anons.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Megapixels? Move to Full-Frame?