This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Another Fuji Zeiss Touit 50mm F2.8 macro photo

Discussion in 'Native X-Mount Lens Forum' started by Bud Weiser, Mar 13, 2018.

  1. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    This was shot at F3.6 at 1/1000 200 ISO. I'm finding this F stop to be the sharpest. Diffraction starts to set in at F4 and is really bad by F8.

    Please login or register to view links by Please login or register to view links, on Flickr
     
    Irene McC likes this.
  2. Shadowside

    Shadowside Good Glass is Forever...

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,019
    Likes Received:
    1,628
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Canada

    -Return to Top-

    Fun shot, but I am surprised by your assertion that defraction starts at f4.0 - that is really unlikely unless there is something wrong with the lens. Based on the the design size of the sensor, you really should see any defraction until f9.0 at the earliest I would think. What you might have is actually focus shift, this can happen at any opening and depending upon lens design can really degrade the image at even larger apertures.
     
  3. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    If you look at lenstip they clearly show that F4 is the sharpest and then it degrades rapidly from there. My copy is very sharp at F2.8 and maxes out by F3.6. I believe Zeiss designed the lens this way specifically because it is a macro. It was not intended to be used as a landscaper but honestly at F3.6 it's sharp as hell.
     
    Shadowside likes this.
  4. Woodworth

    Woodworth Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    Messages:
    721
    Likes Received:
    547
    Location:
    Cumbria, England

    -Return to Top-

    Certainly looks nice and crisp and Zeiss like!
     
  5. Irene McC

    Irene McC Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,256
    Likes Received:
    3,352
    Location:
    Cape Town, South Africa

    -Return to Top-

    Sharp, beautiful.
     
  6. Shadowside

    Shadowside Good Glass is Forever...

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,019
    Likes Received:
    1,628
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Canada

    -Return to Top-

    Hi Bud...

    Took you up on your challenge and you might want to mosey on over to Lenstip and re-read that article... from Lenstip:

    "As you can notice the Zeiss company once again forced us to revise the opening paragraph of this chapter. The tested lens is able to get to a sensational value of over 70 lpmm already at the maximum relative aperture and on stopping down to f/4.0 it reaches a record level of 74.4 ±0.9 lpmm. A round of applause!"
    Retrieved from: Please login or register to view links

    It's not that it's best before or at f4, it's that at f4 its resolution is amazing and set a record at that time - very high! It does drop a bit from there, but nothing to cause reluctance for use. Hard to get hi-res with soft focus...

    Also, from blogs to respected reviewers, they all echo more of less the same thing, the only variant from what I can see is based on the lens being tested on different cameras with different sensors (XE1-X-T2 for example). If you lens is softer beyond f4 right up until f11 then you have a bad unit and you should get it looked at. :)

    And to restate my initial point, even if yours is soft at smaller apertures, according to both the theories of physics and measured observations - diffraction happens the the aperture is set to a smaller size than is ideal for the sensor size. This can be exaggerated by lens design and optical qualities, but typically for an DX sensor it starts around f9 to f11.

    Hope you get it figured out Bud, it's a really nice little lens (or should be) :)

    ***EDIT*** Sorry had to edit this as my Internet connection is acting up, can't do too much at once :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2018
    Irene McC likes this.
  7. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    All I know is that it’s sharpest at f 3.6 to f4 on my lens. Anything after that it starts to lose to diffraction. Not sure I want to pay to get it looked at when it seems to be working for me.
     
    Shadowside likes this.
  8. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    Tree shots for diffraction comparison.

    F3.2

    Please login or register to view links by Please login or register to view links, on Flickr

    F8

    Please login or register to view links by Please login or register to view links, on Flickr
     
  9. Shadowside

    Shadowside Good Glass is Forever...

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,019
    Likes Received:
    1,628
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Canada

    -Return to Top-

    Fair enough, I had a 35Lux serviced right before I sold it - it was not cheap.

    By all means, I wasn't suggesting you use it in a way that does not net you the results you prefer, I was just concerned you had a piece of kit that was under performing through no fault of yours :)

    You works in no way suggest you don't understand your gear :)
     
  10. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    So what's your professional opinion regarding the above tree branch shots?
     
  11. Greg_E

    Greg_E Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,412
    Likes Received:
    293
    Location:
    USA

    -Return to Top-

    Even on my junk monitor in the web browser, there is a difference in the smallest branches. It could just be a contrast change and resolution isn't really affected, or it could be diffraction or focus shift causing the issue. That said, I can see a difference between both of those shots and the higher aperture certainly seems to be less detailed to me.
     
  12. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    My point exactly. Lenstip seems to confirm this as well. If you look at the graph, most lenses look like a bell curve. This ones falls off a cliff after F5.6 in diffraction.
     
  13. Richard_M

    Richard_M Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    1,332
    Location:
    Australia

    -Return to Top-

    It’ll be interesting how the lens performs for macro. To be honest I haven’t checked if Fuji show the effective aperture as Nikon do.
     
  14. Shadowside

    Shadowside Good Glass is Forever...

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,019
    Likes Received:
    1,628
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Canada

    -Return to Top-

    Like I said, I wasn't attacking you, just pointing out a commonly held position with lens testers as well as designers. I also indicated that I found more sites praising the lens (Including lenstip btw) and could not find anyone that shared you experience or observations; this of course doesn't mean you are wrong, but it does raise the question that if your lens performs far worse than the norm you might want to have it looked at.

    I am not a professional - I did not take those shots, I did not process them, would you offer an opinion under those circumstances. Do I see a difference? Didin't look closely because that was not my point, I wasn't questioning your observations, just your conclusion :)

    I did not argue at any point that your lens performs poorly beyond f4, just that if it did it was unlikely (not impossible) to attribute that to diffraction. No lens resolves perfectly or consistently across is aperture range, and there will be degradation at the smaller apertures, I am just not familiar with diffraction occurring at wider apertures, so far this has been supported by all I have read.

    Again, I meant no offense - but I'm done here.
     
  15. Bud Weiser

    Bud Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    440

    -Return to Top-

    Nobody’s attacking anybody LOL. I’m not sure where you got the impresssion that I’m upset in anyway. It couldn’t be farther from the truth, I LIKE Canadians! I just wanted your personal take on the lens situation so Thankyou very much for your input.
    :Slaps high five and offers a LaBatts Blue to you:
     
    Shadowside likes this.
  16. Shadowside

    Shadowside Good Glass is Forever...

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,019
    Likes Received:
    1,628
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Canada

    -Return to Top-

    No Worries honest, I wasn't offended either (maybe more emoticons lol) - I read 'professional' as sarcastic or defensive, so my concern was that I had offended; like you I didn't mean to so we're cool Bud :)

    :Kickin' back, chillin' with a Blue:
     
  17. Greg_E

    Greg_E Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,412
    Likes Received:
    293
    Location:
    USA

    -Return to Top-

    I'm pretty sure mine is softer in macro as well, I haven't used mine much for anything else yet but do remember some flowers looking a little softer when I ran the iris closed to get deeper depth of field. The 8x10 from the drugstore processed print still looks pleasing though.
     

Share This Page

  1. fujix-forum.com uses cookies to help personalize content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice