Telephoto Zoom comparison

ralf-11

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
1,333
It is unclear to me why Leica could not design a tele-convertor that does not degrade IQ. tho that used to be common before the advent of numerical design in optics.

As to the results here, maybe this one is a bad copy.
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,535
Location
USA
Every 2x tele-converter ever produced has degraded the result of the parent lens. That's just physics.
+1 That's also why they are relatively uncommon. TANSTAAFL.

If you mentioned up front that one of the images was taken using a teleconverter I would have predicted that would be the less-sharp image. @alex g nailed that one. If this was a test at all, it certainly wasn't apples to apples.
 

ScottinPollock

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2017
Messages
445
I'm not following your question
SOOC photos have much applied to them including sharpening, white balance, noise reduction, etc, etc. They will look nothing like the raw file as they are already processed in camera.

Here's a 100% crop of a quick snap, both in raw and SOOC. You'll see lens correction, sharpening, noise reduction, and more applied to the SOOC image, and none of it in the raw file. Yet the two screen captures you posted (one supposedly SOOC, and the other raw) appear to be identical.
 

ralf-11

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
1,333
The side by side comparison is LR showing the raw files. So it is the LR engine - No way for me to directly view a raw file, if I understand your stmt.

--------------

I disagree that it is "just physics" that might make a 2x extender on a lens not have equal IQ to a lens twice the FL. Think about how a lens is designed.

Anyway, this combo is obviously not adequate for me, and is boxed for return.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,844
Location
Knoxville, TN
I disagree that it is "just physics" that might make a 2x extender on a lens not have equal IQ to a lens twice the FL. Think about how a lens is designed.

Anyway, this combo is obviously not adequate for me, and is boxed for return.
Yes. Yes it is. When you add optics to "extend" the lens, you are degrading the image. Full Stop. Always has been and always will.

Designers can mitigate some issues by engineering the lens and the tele-converter together, but there is no way around the properties of light.
 

Phocal

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
5,288
Location
Anchorage
I disagree that it is "just physics" that might make a 2x extender on a lens not have equal IQ to a lens twice the FL. Think about how a lens is designed.
A lens twice the focal is designed to be that focal length. With a tc you are basically adding in an enlarger, which is completely different than how a 2x focal length lens is designed.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,844
Location
Knoxville, TN
Further...

I still think that there is an issue with your lens or tele-converter. Those results are not acceptable. I could get better with my 100-300i and cropping to 400 than that, I think. The 50-200 should start at a sharpness where the tele-converter is at least as sharp as the cheap consumer lens, cropped. Do you have the ability to try other bodies? Of run tests on the lens with and without the tele-converter.
 

ralf-11

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
1,333
I could have tried a different body, but why bother? (also my G9 works very very well with my PL 12-60 and other lenses) I agree it seems way off and may be a bad example. I disagree that "it's just physics" but my PhD is not in optics...
 

ScottinPollock

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2017
Messages
445
The side by side comparison is LR showing the raw files. So it is the LR engine - No way for me to directly view a raw file, if I understand your stmt.
Never used LR... is it so bad it is displaying the jpg preview in the raw file? I am just looking for answers as there is no way that lens can be that bad. I have kit lenses that are sharper than that.

Anyway... welcome to Nikon! I've been using their gear for over a decade.
 

ralf-11

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
1,333
Never used LR... is it so bad it is displaying the jpg preview in the raw file? I am just looking for answers as there is no way that lens can be that bad. I have kit lenses that are sharper than that.

Anyway... welcome to Nikon! I've been using their gear for over a decade.
I assume LR uses their own rendering engine.

And - thanks for the 'welcome' to Nikon - but you are 48 years late...
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom