Other than the focal length, the process stayed the same: This time, we took the two lenses and moved them to 20mm for the specific reason of adding the HD 20-40mm Limited into the mix.
Comparison Three - Center Sharpness at 20mm No change from above other than moving our chart to the edge of the frame:Īs you can see, the DA* lens suffers from pretty significant distortion at widest focal length in the edges, and appears to not rid itself of chromatic aberrations across the aperture range. Distance to Test Chart: 100x Focal LengthĬomparison Two - Edge Sharpness at 18mm or 16mm.Shutter Speed: Automatically adjusted to match Aperture Changes.The following settings were applied across all the sample images during this iteration: Comparison One - Center Sharpness at 18mm or 16mmįor our first sharpness comparison test, we were at the minimum focal length of each lens, 18mm for the Sigma and 16mm for the Pentax. Without further ado, the comparison tests at 18/16mm, 20mm, 31mm, and 35/40mm.
#Sigma 18 35 art simulator
The low strength AA simulator was applied across every iteration below for consistency. As such, in order to strike the perfect balance between moire suppression and maximum resolution attainable, we employed the K-3's Anti-Aliasing Filter Simulator (Strength: Low). But, the K-3 has such incredibly high resolution sans any anti-aliasing that moire is certainly bound to appear with the test chart that we are using. We naturally shot with the Pentax K-3 as it's the highest resolution offering from Pentax (as of this review's publication) to wield the K-mount. Because of the premium lenses we are dealing with, we are confident you want to see 100% crops rather than scaled down versions in order to finally settle the score about image quality comparisons between these four lenses at all relevant focal lengths.Īnd finally, a small but important detail regarding our methodology. This page will be an especially long one for no other reason than there's a lot of images combined with their size. As you would expect for the contrary, the closer to the center before the converging lines are indistinguishable, the sharper the lens and the higher a resolution it is capable of attaining. Reading the charts is easy - the earlier the image blurs, the softer the lens. But when shot in a controlled manner alongside other lenses also shot in the same way, the results will speak for themselves. When observed by themselves, they do not offer much information about a lens' ability to resolve fine detail. The below "star charts" are valuable tests because they force a lens, no matter how sharp or soft, to reach its tipping point. For example, at 18mm, the camera was set to 1,800mm, or 1.8m. Speaking of millimeters, you might be interested to know that for every focal length we shot at, the camera was placed exactly 100x the focal length away from our chart. For the comparison, of course the HD 20-40mm F2.8-4 Limited and the DA* 16-50mm F2.8 were used, and for the specific focal length, a fourth lens was added: FA 31mm F1.8 Limited. For each millimeter setting you'll find not only examinations at the center, but the extreme edge of the frame as well. In order to effectively assess the resolution capable of the lens in question, we ran it through a few of its different focal lengths from widest to longest. As such, you have arrived at our most comprehensive (and thus longest) page in this entire review. This is especially true in our pixel-peeping, megapixel-counting, measureabating world of modern photography. Many would argue that if there is just one attribute in a lens to pay overt attention to, it would be sharpness and the maximum resolution the lens in question is capable of. Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM "Art" Sharpness
0 kommentar(er)
