![]() If you want to know more about the MTF50 figures you may check out the corresponding Imatest Explanations The chart shows line widths per picture height (LW/PH) which can be taken as a measure for sharpness. Please note that the MTF results are not directly comparable across the different systems!īelow is a simplified summary of the formal findings. The centering quality of the tested sample was acceptable only. ![]() Diffraction effects are getting somewhat more pronounced at f/11 although this setting remains very usable. The peak performance is reached at f/4 although the quality plateau is very broad from f2/8 all the way up to f/8. The corners have fully recovered at f/2.8 and images are very sharp across the frame. The quality is pretty impressive at medium aperture settings though. ![]() Stopping down to f/2 boosts the quality across the frame with an excellent center, very good borders and good corners. The borders are merely good here and the corners are downright soft. The center quality is very good at f/1.4 already but there's a rather steep drop in quality in the outer image field. The resolution of the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DC DN Contemporary varies quite about across the aperture range. Stopping down to f/2 helps a lot already and the issue is mostly gone from f/2.8 onward. At over 1.8EV (f-stops) at f/1.4, it's rather massive for an APS-C format lens - although that's still mild compared to full format counterparts. Surprisingly, this can't be said about the original vignetting despite the very large front element. With activated image autocorrection, you can spot just a little bit of light falloff (0.7EV / f-stops) at f/1.4 and f/2. We can see a similar pattern when it comes to vignetting.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |