Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I need the help of others who own this lens..  My Sony lens was set to repair twice for the same issue.  First time, IMHO, the problem was partly fixed.  I sent it back a second time with examples of what I saw on my images and just got it back today.  I shot a small number of images today, and I think I still have that same issue.  

Before I get to the details of the problem, I need to say, that I pulled out several images I shot with another lens (100-400mm lens Lumix ,M43)  and looked at these images to see if they showed the same type of shadowing around the edge of the subject when magnified at +200%.  None of these Lumix shot images show this issue.

 

Included are four images.  Images 1-3 are from the Sony 100-400 GM lens. All enlarged  200+%

1. shot before any repair was made.

2. made following the first repair

3. made after the second repair finally as a reference image,

4. an image enlarged to 200+% shot using the Lumix lens.

 

I would be interested in what others who own this lens Sony GM 100-400mm lens find when they enlarge a section of the target image.  Do you also see the slight “shadowing” along the edge of the image.  To see the edge "shadowing" you need to make the image larger than as they appear here.  As I look at the image, the shadowing seems to me to be more evident along the left side of each image.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • Hola, parece que estan agotados, saludos Felipe 
    • I'd suggest you start by running a simple test.  Take pictures of a typical scene/subject and each of the JPEG settings your camera offers.  Then compare them in the output that you normally produce.  You may or may not see a difference.  I normally shoot at the highest JPEG level and save that file -- but make a smaller file (lower resolution) for normal/typical use. There's plenty of editing that you can do with JPEGs on your computer -- depending on your software -- and there are features in your camera that can help out, as well.  That depends on your camera.  Put them together, and it might meet your needs.  For example, your camera probably has several bracketing features that will take the same shot with different settings with one press of the button.  Then you can select the best JPEG to work with on your computer.  I frequently use this feature to control contrast.
    • If you set up some basic presets in your processing software and use batch processing, you don't need jpeg at all. I shoot RAW only, use (free) Faststone Image Viewer which will view any type of image file to cull my shots, and batch process in Darktable. I can start with 2000-3000 shots and in a matter of a few hours have them culled, processed, and posted. A handful of shots, say a couple hundred from a photo walk, are done in minutes.  This saves card space, computer space, and upload time.  The results are very good for posting online. When someone wants to buy one or I decide to print it, I can then return to the RAW file and process it individually for optimum results.  I never delete a RAW file. Sometimes I'll return to an old shot I processed several years ago and reprocess it. I have been very surprised how much better they look as my processing skills improved.  
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...