Friday, January 23, 2015

Sunrise on the sea / Sonnenaufgang auf dem Meer

Morning mood  -  Morgenstimmung  105mm f5
Well, actually this picture was taken far from the sea. Looking south-east to the Alpes, in the morning frequently the rising sun manages to still shine below the cloud cover. But since the clouds formed a perfectly horizontal line, the scene managed to look like taken on the coast.Funny what impact knowing or not knowing the context can make.
---
Nun, eigentlich ist dieses Foto fern vom Meer aufgenommen worden. In Richtung Südost hin zu den Alpen blickend, schafft es die aufgehende Sonne morgens oft noch unterhalb der Wolkendecke hindurch zu leuchten. Aber da die Wolkendecke eine nahezu perfekte horizontale Grenze gebildet hatten, wirkt die Szene wie an der Küste. Es ist schon erstaunlich welche Auswirkung es macht ob man den Kontext kennt - oder nicht.

Equipment used:
Sony SELP18105G E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Zoom Lens
Sony Alpha a6000 Camera  

Benutzte Ausrüstung:
Sony SEL-P18105G E PZ 18-105 mm F4 G OSS Zoom-Objektiv
Sony Alpha 6000 Systemkamera

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Snow white / Schneewittchen

"Oh how I wish that I had a daughter that had skin as white as snow, lips as red as blood, and hair as black as ebony"
Can't help myself, looking at this sunset, this is what came into my mind.
...
„Hätt’ ich ein Kind, so weiß wie Schnee, so rot wie Blut und so schwarz wie das Holz an dem Rahmen!“
Ich kann mir nicht helfen, diese Gedanken gingen mir bei diesem Sonnenuntergang durch den Kopf.

Schneewittchen











 






Equipment used:
Sony SELP18105G E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Zoom Lens
Sony Alpha a6000 Camera  

Benutzte Ausrüstung:
Sony SEL-P18105G E PZ 18-105 mm F4 G OSS Zoom-Objektiv
Sony Alpha 6000 Systemkamera  

Saturday, January 10, 2015

Noise comparison of A6000 versus 5N / Rauschvergleich für die A6000 und Nex 5N

Hi,
since I stumbled upon statements claiming that the A6000 to be inferior in regards to noise to the old 5N, and I own both, I made a quick test comparing both.

Common Settings

Tripod, 2 sec delay, steadyshot, center field AF, lens SEL50F18, f8, WB set manually to the white paper.
I then set the A6000 with exposure to the right and checked the histogramm for no clipping. This was (for the test scene) at Exp. compensation of + 0.3 EV.
Now everyone knows that the old Nexes tend to heavily underexpose, but I had to set the 5N to exp.comp. of +1.7 EV for similar histogram and shutter speed!
Similar shutter speed indicates that both sensors are of similar sensitivity, with a very minor tendency of the 5N not need longer shutter speeds at higher ISOs.
Different exposure compensation means that the program logic of the A6000 is much better by default.
NR in camera was set to Low.

Test scene

Test Scene, note that phone and bottle are in the front and therefore not as sharp as the mid section where the AF was directed at.


This is NOT the real file with the full resolution, use the download link below
The comparison consists of four crops at 100% from left bottom, right bottom, mid bottom and mid section.


Download from Google drive and view locally on your PC for correct rendering


The pictures from the A6000 were resized to 16 Mpx.

In the mid horizontal lines from left to right are the crops from the OutOfCamera-Jpgs, A6000 on top, 5N below. The crops run from left to right from ISO 100, 800, 1600, 3200 and 6400.

For ISO 100, I also have added the JPG files obtained from Adobe Camera Raw, applying USM with 100/1.2/3. For ISO3200, the same, with NR of 30/20/0/50/50.

Lastly, for ISO 100 and 3200, I also added on top the crops from the not resized 24 Mpx JPG OOC file. Please note that for ISO3200, there is one typo listing it as "ISO100 1/5 sec" instead of the correct "ISO3200 1/5 sec".

Conclusion

If both cameras are properly exposed à ETTR, the noise level of both cameras is very similar from ISO100 to 6400. The noise of the A6000 is more fine-grained, the 5N is more blotchy. The 5N applies stronger sharpening, which can be seen at ISO100 through the slight halos indicating oversharpening. Using Raw, both are very similar again. Remember that this was with incamera NR setting to Low. I do not recommend to use the NR-high setting in the A6000.

However, as the RAW-JPGs prove, the cameras themselves are almost identical in noise and detail, with the edge going to the downsized files from the A6000. Also, this proves that there is NO incamera RAW NR as some have claimed. In reality however, the 5N might even be more prone to higher noise in case the user does not use ETTR to compensate for the 5N's strong tendency to underexpose, and consequently has to compensate in post-processing.

Tuesday, January 6, 2015

Review SELP18105 -Part 2- Real Pixel-peepin' stuff, compared with SEL1018-1650-1855-(1670)-FD35-FD100

Update 18.2.2017 With Capture One v10, Distortion correction works now excellently. One can pick either the Phase One profile or the embedded one.
Update 6.5.15: I compared distortion-corrected JPGs against other lenses and found that for the 18105, this results in approximately 18mm of the 18105 being about 19mm in other lenses, 22->24mm, 35->38, 46->50mm, ...and 101->103 mm.
Update 8.5.15: There is another comparison with 1670 and 1650 now available  
Update 16.9.2015 The current Capture One does a better job in terms of lens correction for the 18105.

Alright folks, for all of you fellow-addicted pixel peepers out there, here is some real stuff to wear your eyes out with. 
The test candiates

What I did.

I shot my standard scene with the A6000 on tripod, OSS off using most of the lenses available to me, among them the zooms SEL1018, SEL1650, SEL18105, SEL1855 as well as two FD primes, the FD35/2.8 and the FD100/2.8. For the zooms I went through most setting of the available range, like 10, 12, 16, 18, 24, 35, 50, 70, 90, 105 mm and apertures mostly f4, 5.6 and f8.

I then cropped the left upper edges and compiled a comparison JPG file. In another file are the center crops. From my previous test of the SEL1670, I added some crops, too, though of course weather and light conditions were different then, thefore no comment on those. Some few shots apparently were shaken like the 50 mm f5.6 and 70mm f4 18105 shot, probably by accidentally touching the tripod.

There is also a special section on the distortion of the SELP18105 which may be of interest.
The scene at 10 mm

How to properly peep.

To not get lost in the complexity of the available pictures, check the legend where which lens is located. It follows (my weird sense of) logic, so it can be understood with some effort :-)

The resulting files are large and blogger does not render the images properly. Therefore it is best to download and view locally. For comparison, I recommend to open and crop to the lens you are interested in, and then do the same once more with the lens you want to compare it to.

The roadmap where which lens is located

What I noticed aka Executive Summary.

The SEL1018 is a good lens, should be used at f5.6 to f8. At 18mm it has the best edges but the weakest center.
My SEL1855 is ok from 18 to 35 mm but needs stopping down and still has the lowest contrast and sharpness.
The SEL1650 is good when stopped down once, at f8 it is about equal to the SEL18105. The latter however usually is as sharp at about one stop more open.
6.2.15 Update after comparing both 1650 and 18105 in a landscape test f4-8, 18-50mm: From 18-35 mm edges are better with the 1650 with most improvement seen at 18mm and then declining. At 50 mm things have inverted with the SEL18105 clearly sharper than the SEL1650. So if you own both, you might prioritize to use the 1650 from 16-35, and the 18105 from 35 to 105mm.
The SEL18105 is better at 105mm f4 than the FD100/2.8. The latter is sharper at f5.6 and f8.
The SEL18105 can be used all over its range. Recommended aperture is f5.6 to f8. AF-C sets this lens at f4.5 and this will already deliver sharp results within the zooms range. Lens distortion is not corrected well from 24-35mm, see section on distortion.
The inexpensive, light weight FD35/2.8 is one great lens from 2.8 to f8. A FF lens that can be well used on a high-resolution APSC sensor.

The files.

Remember to download and view with your viewer of choice since blogger/google messes up JPGs.
Center crops

Download (30 MB!)

Edge crops
Download (37 MB!)

Distortion of the SELP18105.

The SELP has quite a big range at a low cost, especially compared to the SEL1670. This apparently was achieved by using more inexpensive optical design, mandating a stronger degree of SW based lens distortion correction to compensate. A similar approach as with the SELP1650.
This can be done either incamera, using firmware information from the lens, or in post-processing in the raw converter.

So far, so good.

However, the implementation of Sony seems to be not that effective. Taking into account that my setup may not be perfectly rectangularily aligned to the building front, the distortion at 24 and 35 mm is weird, to say the least.

In my view, Sony should update the lens firmware with a more accurate correction profile.

18 mm
24 mm
35 mm
50 mm
70 mm
90 mm
105 mm
Well, so why doesn't knock this distortion my shoes off in horror?
Because
- it is SW correctable in Adobe Camera Raw and in Capture One
- it is not that noticable in real life shots

Here what ACR does at 24mm when you set lens correction to 134%:
24 mm from RAW with Adobe CR, 134% correction
Unfortunately, Capture One does not perform quite as well, more like the Incamera implementation. Since Capture One uses the profile embedded in the ARW files that should not be a surprise.
Update 18.2.2017 With Capture One v10, Distortion correction works now excellently. One can pick either the Phase One profile or the ARW-embedded one. The Phase One profile additionally allows to correct sharpness dropoff at the sides of a lens.
24 mm from RAW, using Capture One with Lens correction
Here another shot to illustrate that usually you won't notice it that much, straight from the camera at 35mm:
35 mm, out-of-camera
So what is the conclusion on that? I still like my SEL18105, but wish that Sony would provide a better firmware to have less effort when using the lens to its full potential.

Back to reality.

Taken by an imperfect human,
using imperfect equipment.
Have fun.


Equipment used: SELP18105G E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Zoom Lens; Sony a6000 Camera ; SEL1018 10-18mm Wide-Angle Zoom Lens; SEL50F18/B 50mm f/1.8 Lens; SELP1650 16-50mm Zoom Lens; Nex 5N; Canon FD100/2.8; Slik Sprint Mini II Tripod with Ball Head

Benutzte Ausrüstung: SEL-P18105G E PZ 18-105 mm F4 G OSS Zoom; Sony 6000 Systemkamera ; SEL1018 Ultraweitwinkel; SEL-P1650 Objektiv 16-50 mm OSS; SEL-50F18B Objektiv  F/1.8 OSS); Nex 5N; Canon FD100/2.8; Slik Sprint Mini II GM Stativ (mit Kopf) grau-metallic

Modern Geysirs / Moderne Thermalquellen

Our Man-Made Yellowstone
It has been quite some time since mankind first sat besides a thermal hot spring and enjoyed to relax in its warmth. Today, we harness similar powers comfortably under our control, while in the sky seemingly endless warmth is generated day after day.

---

Es ist schon ganz schön lange her, seit die Menschheit zum ersten Mal an einer heissen Quelle saß und es genoss in dessen Wärme zu entspannen. Heute haben wir ähnliche Kräfte unter unseren komfortablen Kontrolle, während am Himmel Tag für Tag scheinbar unendlich Wärme erzeugt wird.

---

Shot through the glass window with the A6000 & 18105 at 105mm f9.

Equipment used:
Sony SELP18105G E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Zoom Lens
Sony Alpha a6000 Camera  

Benutzte Ausrüstung:
Sony SEL-P18105G E PZ 18-105 mm F4 G OSS Zoom-Objektiv
Sony Alpha 6000 Systemkamera  

Friday, January 2, 2015

The Review: SELP18105 zoom lens in amateur hands

Sony SELP18105F4 – the review part 1  

Update 18.2.2017 Surprisingly for me, the interest in this review is still going strong after two years and will shortly reach the 20k clicks. Maybe this is due to the continously high percentage of 1670s dud lenses approaching roughly two digit range. Maybe it is because the 18105 so nicely complements the 1018 for a super wide focal range travel zoom kit. Or because it is an affordable, high image quality standard zoom also allowing great video capture? In any case, enjoy the following review :-).
Update 6.1.15: Part 2 for pixel peepers available  For those who really want to dig the pixels :-)   
Update 9.1.15: Added another detail shot at 74 mm 
Update 8.5.15: There is another comparison with 1670 and 1650 now available
This lens means business :-)

On A6000 with hood
On A6000 without hood


Prehistory 

Regarding zoom lenses, I have been using the SEL1855 extensively on my 5N as well as the SEL1650 and SEL1018 on my A6000. I also tried out the SEL1670 for some time.

The SEL1855 (at least my copy) was visible less sharp and contrasty than my 1650 in the wide region, and not better at the long end. 
Retired unless for high-casualty situations.
Vintage SEL1855


The SEL1650 offers 16mm and is very good in the mid range around 24mm, outmatching the SEL1670 I had. However, vignetting compensation is strong and increases edge noise at high ISO. The lack of a lens hood I compensated by using my hood of the 1855 instead (see other blog entry).  The long end performance is nothing to write home about, especially with the minimum aperture of f5.6, but I usually switch to the great SEL50F18 for that purpose. The big advantages of the inexpensive SEL1650 (even with hood mounted) are the very small size, light weight and the good IQ from 16 to about 35mm if stopped down. The SEL1650 however is not for low DOF. It is sharp at the wide end where you generally have large DOF, and the long end has minimum f5.6 and needs further stopping down to improve IQ.
My current everyday lens.
The most compact and light zoom lens
for Sony's APSC camera series
Turned on, it gets larger....
.... and after adding the lens hood, larger


My current everyday lens.

The SEL1018 offers a lightweight zoom lens with super wide view, coupled with OSS allowing to go stop down even in lower light. The lens is best around f5.6 to f8 and 10-12 mm and still good at the long end of 18mm. This zoom lens is outside of the competition except for extending the standard zooms to wider regions.
The architecture and sky specialist.

So no need for another zoom lens, right?

Well, in my view a standard zoom lens should work for most everyday shooting situations. Lack of low DOF at the long end with most kit lenses as well as the sad lack of longer E-mount native primes around 85 to 100 mm leave a gaping hole in the functionality of the available standard e-mount zooms.

The SEL-1670Z Lens comes to the rescue, adding both a longer tele end (making it an equivalent of a stabilized 24-105mm f5.6 FF lens) as well as providing a constant f4 throughout the zoom range. The lens bears a Zeiss label which is reflected in low optical distortions and a great build quality. Wide-open, it is mostly better than the SEL1650. But stopped down to f8, the differences became so small that in a blind test I created on dpreview, the majority mistook the shots from my 1650 as being the Zeiss ones. 
Product shot from Amazon.de
Furthermore, there are some shortcomings:

Price: Initially launched at 1000 Euros, then coupled with the A6000 at 800 Euros, it can be now had for 800 Euros as single part. This is still a steep price since this is not a FF lens, but might be acceptable if the quality holds up. Used copies are somewhat cheaper, but due to QC (see below) a gamble without return policy.

Image quality: Several initial reviews showed a lack of quality control with a significant probability of decentered lenses. Also, while providing very good IQ at 16mm and good IQ at the long end wide-open, the mid range around 24 mm was only average on mine and Kurt Munger's copies. Then, even stopped down the edges don't get that sharp. 
I have posted a extensive zoom comparison here between the 1650 and 1670 on the A6000 here, as well as more here. To put things into perspective, a comparsion to A7-FF might also help. 
QC appears to have picked up with the recent copies. Testing and selecting a good copy out of several is however not possible in every country, and shouldn't be necessary in this price region. I wasn't motivated to try that out yet.
UPDATE 19.4.15: I have recently bought and tested another copy of the SEL1670. Unfortunately, it was again a fail, read more here.

Range: Well, what is there left to complain about a lens offering a nice FF equivalent 24 to 105mm? That the actual 70mm are nice, but not far enough away from the available excellent Sony SEL-50F18, Sony SEL55F18Z Sonnar and Sigma 60mm f2,8 primes, outshining the zoom lens even if they are cropped down to offer the same view. Agreeable a minor thing, but worthy keeping in mind in relation with the SELP18105.

Build: A good lens needs a bigger size, especially if being constant f4. However, at the lower focal end and stopped down, the SEL1650 competes with this lens in terms of IQ, but offers dramatically smaller size, weight and price. Furthermore, the great impression of the Zeiss is somewhat marred when you extend to tele, since then the same plastic inner tube design protrudes out of the metal body as with the SEL1855:
Yes, this is not the SEL1670 but the SEL1855, but no, the SEL1670's tube doesn't look much different extended except obviously being painted black. Google yourself for some pic's.

Enter the SELP18105.

SELP18105F4

Declared as a videographers lens because of the power zoom function, but also labeled as a “G” lens by Sony. Let's go through the main criteria:

Build quality: The lens with the lengthy name Sony SEL-P18105G E PZ 18-105 mm F4 G OSS is larger (11x8 versus 10x9 cm) than the SEL1670 and weighs more (427 versus 308g), too. However, it is a constant length build, meaning that no outside parts extend or move during focus nor zoom operation. Great for that shot on a sandy & windy beach. Furthermore, its full metal body looks at least as well built as the Zeiss 1670. In fact, it reminds me of the good ol' Minolta beer can zoom, although is only about half the length and weight. Also keep in mind that with both constant f4 lenses, the camera is no longer a pocketable oversized compact camera on steroids. I personally found the weight and handling not that different from the 1670 and surprisingly light & comfortable for the large diameter of the lens.

Range: It offers a FF equivalent stabilized range of 28 to 155mm f5.6. So you sacrifice some wide range and get more tele range. If you are into lower DOF, this lens allows more of that than the 1670 when you go beyond 70mm.

Image quality: This is no prime lens. But the images are sharp! Nice to actually get low DOF with an e-mount zoom lens. I compared with my FD100/2.8 at f4, and the SELP18105 is sharper, more contrasty and with better color!

To illustrate bokeh and sharpness, a ISO3200 105mm f 4 out-of-camera shot with small spot focus on the eye. 
Of course, the SEL50 would technically beat this shot, but it wouldn't allow the necessary distance from the wild animal :-).

This is ISO3200 100% with an inexpensive zoom lens hand-held wide open! You can see me reflected in eye of the cat.
Keep in mind that to evaluate, download the image since blogger doesn't display properly.
Since ISO3200 is not what most will have in mind as a good starting point for good image quality, I have now added another shot at ISO800, 74 mm f4:
AF with Small Spot Focus on left eye ISO800 74 mm f4 1/125 sec
100 % crop, please download and view locally to assess image quality correctly


Stabilization: Works great. I shot fireworks hand-held and the pictures were fine. I suspect that the large lens barrel actually helps a lot in keeping the lens-body in a calm, relaxed grip during shooting.
This is a 4 Mpx crop (!), ISO500 18mm f4 1/40 handheld -3EV OOC. I took a series of these fireworks and all were instantenously focused using AF-C and not shaken.
AF: I initially had some misses in AF-A during a low contrast snow day, but then I am not sure whether I waited for focus confirmation, I certainly didn't check what & if the camera locked upon. When I took  static scenes, AF was good using AF-A. However, I was really pleasantly surprised shooting fireworks hand-held with AF-C, fixed ISO 500, -3EV, AF-6-field. The camera instantly locked focus time after time, see example above.

Power Zoom operation: Maybe I am in the meantime accustomed to power zoom operation after using the SEL1650 for some time, since every great photographer is supposed to hate it. But using the lens ring (instead of the slider) to change focal length feels actually surprisingly quite natural, if slightly delayed.

Normal operation and Handling: When powering up the camera, or after sleep, there is a noticeable delay before the screen stops showing a black image. Otherwise, the handling is smooth, the lens rests comfortable in my hands and looks & feels nice. MF with fly-by-wire is same as with other lenses, that is poor compared to a real mechanically-coupled MF lens operation.

Price: The lens can be currently had for below 500 Euros. I got mine from Amazon.DE (SEL-P18105G F4 G OSS) in a fire sale for 410 Euros. I consider this price, in relation to the functionality and the delivered image quality, a similar bargain like the SEL50F18. Both share great image quality, low price, and some drawbacks (in the case of the SEL50 slower AF and more CA when wide-open). Furthermore, like many I am still tempted to go FF in the long run, even after a – for me - sobering time with the A7 (sensor reflections, light leaks through the wobbly mount, kit zoom problems). Investing kilo Euros in expensive lenses for e-mount with a proportional loss in resale value is something to be considered, but not a stopping point with this lens compared to the SEL1670.

Shortcomings of the SELP18105:
Build: If you want to use your camera exclusively as a compact, pocketable system, stick with the SEL1650, use it between 16-35mm, stop down, and be happy. The SEL18105 lens is not pocketable. Neither is the SEL1670. But you can easily afford to keep the SEL1650 on top for those space-restricted situations. And remember, "I'm all about that bass" ....


Image quality: While vignetting and distortion at 18mm is low (and IMHO is almost optional), the in-camera distortion correction around 50mm is visibly not working that well. Sony please provide a lens firmware update! Adobe Camera Raw however removes it fine. Also, as with the SEL50 and my FD135/2.8, high contrast shots with e.g. glistening chrome edges can have some purple CA when shot wide-open. This however can be removed in Adobe by e.g. reducing violet saturation. These are 1 Mpx ISO3200 crops at 100%, so you can see this effect is not really that visible:

ISO3200, OOC, uncorrected
From ACR, purple saturation reduced

Range: After wishing for 16mm during my 1855-days, and using the 16mm with my 1650 quite frequently, it is a step backwards reducing the wide end to 18mm, especially since the 18105 looks more like 19mm after lens compensation. That being said, I still have the 1650 as well as the 1018 if I want to go wider. And currently I am more busy playing around with the longer end and low DOF.

The Verdict.

One should always take a step back from the pixel peeping stuff and assess what easily visible improvements for your personal photography can be had from potential new equipment. This is not about 100% pixel peeping edge sharpness at all, but instead what your wife sees from across the room glancing at your 27” monitor at full picture view. This sobering feedback is a good guideline to avoid G.A.S. induced shopping. For example, the SEL50F18 gives you beautiful low DOF for portraits & details, coupled with OSS to allow sharp AF'd night time street photography. The Sel1018 gets you that incredible superwide views that you got your first hint of with the SEL1650 at 16mm.

Now, the SEL18105 gets you into low DOF territority with an well-affordable all-round, everyday zoom lens, coupled with a real tele range (replacing your MF legacy primes), but without the usual loss in image quality associated with the quite heavy super zooms (18-200). It also works at night time, but of course can't replace a stabilized prime in that application.

Due to (too) many internet opinions, I was expecting to find this a cumbersome, heavy and optically inferior zoom lens. Quite opposite, I found it to be a large but light, well-operating and sharp lens giving me back a lot of fun and creative freedom in shooting.

A useful, good lens.

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

In future parts of this review to come, I'll do my usual lens comparison series at different apertures and focal lengths, so us pixel peepers can have REAL fun :-). But that needs better weather and lots of sunshine for my standard location to become accessible.

If this review was helpful or not to you, feel free to comment. Also, if you feel inclined to spend your hard-earned money on Amazon, it would be nice if you'd go there through one of those product links above to Amazon.de or here:  Sony SEL-P18105G E PZ 18-105 mm F4 G OSS
For you visitors from the US, you might consider Amazon.com. The lens is located there, too: Sony SELP18105G E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS, currently at 598$.

Some example shots follow here, scaled to 50% (8Mpx). Download and use your own viewer instead of your webbrowser for best image quality: