Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Optics Theory -

Optics Theory - This forum is aimed towards the TECHNICAL side of photographic OPTICS THEORY. There will be some overlap by camera/manufacturer, but this forum is for the heavy duty tech discussions. This is NOT the place to discuss a specific lens or lens line, do that in the appropriate forum. This is the forum to discuss optics or lenses in general, to learn about the tech behind the lenses and images. IF you have a question about a specific lens, post it in the forum about that type of camera, NOT HERE.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Heavy Distortion FUJIFILM XF 23mm f/2 R WR Lens
Old 04-04-2019   #1
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Heavy Distortion FUJIFILM XF 23mm f/2 R WR Lens

I was going over a series of images shot last year with my X-T1 and the Fuji XF 23mm f/2 R WR lens bought at B&H last year, and was impressed by the amount of distortion of all backgrounds, specially of buildings. Most of the times I could not correct the distortion with Adobe LR. Or is it only me?
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #2
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,112
Are you certain you see lens distortion and not perspective? This comes up quite often. That things further away are depicted smaller, making rectangles into trapezoids etc., is not something that lenses do, it's a result of seeing a three-dimensional world from one point. I don't see why you couldn't correct lens distortion of whatever level in LR.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #3
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
Are you certain you see lens distortion and not perspective? This comes up quite often. That things further away are depicted smaller, making rectangles into trapezoids etc., is not something that lenses do, it's a result of seeing a three-dimensional world from one point. I don't see why you couldn't correct lens distortion of whatever level in LR.
This thread was resolved by the second post.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #4
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Unedited file.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #5
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,568
I've never experienced distortion with my 23/2. I recall Lenstip's review of the lens indicated virtually zero distortion, even in uncorrected Raw files. Also, LR automatically corrects the Raw files from the 23/2 by applying Fuji's lens profile.

EDIT: You posted image shows the perspective distortion retinax mentioned. It's present in all lenses, more pronounced as they get wider.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #6
BernardL
Registered User
 
BernardL is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 153
Perspective: straight lines that are parallel in real world are recorded as converging lines, straight but not parallel. The rules of perspective have been established by Brunelleschi and Alberti in the 15th century.

Distortion: straight lines in real world are recorded as (more or less) curved.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #7
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,379
If you are looking for perspective and volume deformation corrections then DXO Viewpoint gives a lot of control.

https://www.dxo.com/dxo-viewpoint/

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #8
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Thanks for the suggestions, but I returned the lens already. And the camera as well.
DXO is not for free, right? And there are many lenses that don't have distortion at all. Isn't it a paradox to have to purchase extra software to correct lens design flaws? To me the heavy distortion displayed by this lens is a serious flaw.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn View Post
If you are looking for perspective and volume deformation corrections then DXO Viewpoint gives a lot of control.

https://www.dxo.com/dxo-viewpoint/

Shawn
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #9
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Thanks for the suggestions, but I returned the lens already. And the camera as well.
DXO is not for free, right? And there are many lenses that don't have distortion at all. Isn't it a paradox to have to purchase extra software to correct lens design flaws? To me the heavy distortion displayed by this lens is a serious flaw.
No, because those corrections have nothing to do with a 'flaw' in the lens. That is the reality of all wide angle lenses, even an optically 'perfect' lens will have perspective and volume deformations.

Optical lens quality distortions are combinations of barrel and pincushion distortions. Your image isn't showing that. Your image is showing perspective distortion which was caused because you didn't have the lens level and square with your subject. You were shooting with the camera pointing down, the top of your image is closer to the sensor than the bottom of your image. You would get that same distortion with any lens of that focal length if it was held at the same angle.

As an easy example of this take out the camera on your phone. Hold the camera up to a framed picture on your wall, tilt the camera top torward/away from the frame and watch how that changes the perspective distortion on the screen. That is what happened in your picture.


You can correct that (to a point) in LR but you needed to use the transform controls. The real solution is of course to understand where the distortion came from so you can avoid it next time. A different camera + lens won't solve this.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #10
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Thanks for the suggestions, but I returned the lens already. And the camera as well.
DXO is not for free, right? And there are many lenses that don't have distortion at all. Isn't it a paradox to have to purchase extra software to correct lens design flaws? To me the heavy distortion displayed by this lens is a serious flaw.
As has been pointed out, the lens is not showing a flaw whatsoever.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #11
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Thanks for the suggestions, but I returned the lens already. And the camera as well.
DXO is not for free, right? And there are many lenses that don't have distortion at all. Isn't it a paradox to have to purchase extra software to correct lens design flaws? To me the heavy distortion displayed by this lens is a serious flaw.
I predict you will be returning a lot of lenses and cameras.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #12
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,365
As others mentioned, keeping the camera square to the subject will eliminate converging verticals (also called keystoning). We see converging verticals when lines that are | | in reality render as / \ . This has nothing to do with lens quality. All you can do is tilt the camera until the converging vertical edges render as lines. In many cases (tall buildings) this is impractical. You can't get the camera high enough and still frame the subjects of interest.

The X-Pro 1 has an electronic level that helps eliminate horizontal tilt. You can check for vertical tilt by inspection using the optional grid overlay in the EVF display. I'm not sure the converging verticals are easy to detect in the OVF.

Most post-production software will correct for converging verticals. However this results in a crop. The larger the correction the more the frame becomes cropped. Im my experience correction converging verticals is very easy when there is no horizontal tilt. Automate correction works well in Adobe products. But when both planes are off, proper corrections can be tedious.

Kudos to Shawn for mentioning a volume deformation. This always occurs because it impossible to project three-dimensional objects into a two-dimensional plane without error. So lens quality is not a factor. Volume deformation is often observed when spherical objects render as ellipsoids or square objects render as rectangles. When you are close to objects and, or they are at the frame edges, volume deformation is most obvious.

Newer versions of Photoshop will minimize volume deformation (link).
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #13
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,379
Here is a DXO tutorial for their volume corrections. Works well and is easy to combine with their other corrections too.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #14
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,568
This is a job for Sinar, Linhof, Deardorff, etc.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #15
slantface
Jordan Dickinson
 
slantface is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Age: 38
Posts: 673
That image posted looks totally fine and what I'd expect from the 23mm. I don't understand this original post as it seems you are after lens qualities that don't really exist. How do you shoot normally if that image is "too distorted" to the point of returning the camera/lens? Do you shoot only longer/tele focal lengths that are more to your liking?

Sorry, just confused on this whole thing...
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #16
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by slantface View Post
That image posted looks totally fine and what I'd expect from the 23mm. I don't understand this original post as it seems you are after lens qualities that don't really exist. How do you shoot normally if that image is "too distorted" to the point of returning the camera/lens? Do you shoot only longer/tele focal lengths that are more to your liking?

Sorry, just confused on this whole thing...
I shoot street mainly, and try to get as close as possible to my subjects. And I live in NYC where we have streets packed with buildings. As was pointed out here earlier, you can't always correct distortion on LR and crop images afterwards. This image isn't fine: look the top right of the vertical window frame, look the green subway fence that is not parallel but deviates apart. Some degree of distortion is natural. There are many! wide lenses without this huge amount of distortion. And I expected this 23mm to be one with little to none distortion.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #17
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
I shoot street mainly, and try to get as close as possible to my subjects. And I live in NYC where we have streets packed with buildings. As was pointed out here earlier, you can't always correct distortion on LR and crop images afterwards. This image isn't fine: look the top right of the vertical window frame, look the green subway fence that is not parallel but deviates apart. Some degree of distortion is natural. There are many! wide lenses without this huge amount of distortion. And I expected this 23mm to be one with little to none distortion.

Lens distortion would mean the window frame wasn't a straight line, or that the subway fences weren't a straight line but were curved.

This is an actual example of lens distortion from the Fuji 35mm f2:



In your pictures you have straight lines. The lens isn't distorting the picture.

That your lines aren't parallel to each other is perspective distortion. That distortion is not due to the lens at all. What you are seeing is the result of your camera being tilted relative to the subject. Nothing more.

Any same focal length wide angle lens will have the same perspective distortion if the camera+lens is tilted relative to the subject.

The wider you go, the more obvious it becomes.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #18
BernardL
Registered User
 
BernardL is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 153
Quote:
Thanks for the suggestions, but I returned the lens already. And the camera as well.
So you ask a question on a forum, and less than 6 hours later, as several people are trying to explain to you that your image is OK, you draw your own conclusions and return the lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #19
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Another photograph shot with X-T1 and 23mm f/2 with heavy distortion. When I try to correct the image using LR I have to crop and the head gets trimmed off.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #20
13Promet
Registered User
 
13Promet's Avatar
 
13Promet is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Milano - Italy
Age: 47
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Another photograph shot with X-T1 and 23mm f/2 with heavy distortion. When I try to correct the image using LR I have to crop and the head gets trimmed off.
This is even funnier: you're pretending the lens to straighten your bent shot
__________________
The perfect traveller does not know his destination (Lao Tsu)

www.alessandrosaponaro.com

Instagram: a.saponaro.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #21
nzeeman
Registered User
 
nzeeman's Avatar
 
nzeeman is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: belgrade
Age: 39
Posts: 1,241
this is some joke post,right? i dont even know where do you see distortion on this one-can you explain us better?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Another photograph shot with X-T1 and 23mm f/2 with heavy distortion. When I try to correct the image using LR I have to crop and the head gets trimmed off.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #22
13Promet
Registered User
 
13Promet's Avatar
 
13Promet is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Milano - Italy
Age: 47
Posts: 318
As already pointed out, the distortion visible in your shot does not depend on the lens at all: it's perspective.
If you crouched a bit ad kept the sensor plane parallel to the fence, you'd get no distortion.

Or - from the standpoint you shot from - by using a tilt-shift lens, but that's another story and not really convenient for fast-paced sreet photography.
And anyway you'd need to understand perspective first, which you don't really seem to be keen on.

Ah... it's not a good habit to ask questions when you don't consider answers.
Especially if they are 100% consistent with each other
__________________
The perfect traveller does not know his destination (Lao Tsu)

www.alessandrosaponaro.com

Instagram: a.saponaro.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #23
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13Promet View Post

Ah... it's not a good habit to ask questions when you don't consider answers.
Especially if they are 100% consistent with each other
Am not closed to opinions. And I am not saying Fuji is bad. After I tossed my X-T1 along with the 23mm f/2 I purchased again the X100, but this time the faster focusing X100F, which is not giving me the "perspective" concern you mention.
And after researching a bit I found out that the 23mm f/2 has indeed a tendency to distortion (trying to avoid the term flaw and issue). I should have done the research before I bought the camera-lens combo.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #24
nickthetasmaniac
Registered User
 
nickthetasmaniac is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
the faster focusing X100F, which is not giving me the "perspective" concern you mention.
The X100 will give you exactly the same perspective distortion if you point it at the same subject from the same spot. As will any camera/lens with the same field of view.

This is one of the most baffling threads I've read on RFF...
__________________
Ricoh GRII | Pentax SV, SP-F, MX & LX | Leica M2 | Olympus Pen F + 35RD | Minolta Autocord | Hasselblad 500cm + SWC/m

Instagram @other_strange_creatures
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #25
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Am not closed to opinions. And I am not saying Fuji is bad. After I tossed my X-T1 along with the 23mm f/2 I purchased again the X100, but this time the faster focusing X100F, which is not giving me the "perspective" concern you mention.
And after researching a bit I found out that the 23mm f/2 has indeed a tendency to distortion (trying to avoid the term flaw and issue). I should have done the research before I bought the camera-lens combo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickthetasmaniac View Post
The X100 will give you exactly the same perspective distortion if you point it at the same subject from the same spot. As will any camera/lens with the same field of view.

This is one of the most baffling threads I've read on RFF...
I think the 100F doesn't have the distortion because it focuses faster. The photo can be taken before the distortion appears.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

B&h
Old 04-04-2019   #26
KenR
Registered User
 
KenR is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 707
B&h

Nobody is mentioning the fact that B&H took back the lens and camera after an unknown period of time (months?). That is great customer service which should be acknowledged as such.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #27
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
I think the 100F doesn't have the distortion because it focuses faster. The photo can be taken before the distortion appears.

D**n... I've got to get one of those!!
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-T3; X-Pro1; XF10

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #28
Brian Atherton
Registered User
 
Brian Atherton's Avatar
 
Brian Atherton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Based in Blighty
Posts: 606
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
I think the 100F doesn't have the distortion because it focuses faster. The photo can be taken before the distortion appears.
This made my day. One of the funniest comments I've read on the RFF in a long, long while.
__________________
Brian

"Maintenant, mon ami !"
http://www.asingulareye.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Science FTW!
Old 04-05-2019   #29
Tim Murphy
Registered User
 
Tim Murphy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 405
Science FTW!

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
I think the 100F doesn't have the distortion because it focuses faster. The photo can be taken before the distortion appears.
Perfect explanation!
__________________
Then the coal company came with the world's largest shovel
And they tortured the timber and stripped all the land
Well, they dug for their coal till the land was forsaken
Then they wrote it all down as the progress of man.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #30
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickthetasmaniac View Post
The X100 will give you exactly the same perspective distortion if you point it at the same subject from the same spot. As will any camera/lens with the same field of view.

This is one of the most baffling threads I've read on RFF...
Not all 23mm are built equally. Not all lenses in the same focal length are built equally. I thought you guys knew that.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #31
nickthetasmaniac
Registered User
 
nickthetasmaniac is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Not all 23mm are built equally. Not all lenses in the same focal length are built equally. I thought you guys knew that.
We do know that, no one in the thread has said otherwise.

But perspective distortion will be the same for both...
__________________
Ricoh GRII | Pentax SV, SP-F, MX & LX | Leica M2 | Olympus Pen F + 35RD | Minolta Autocord | Hasselblad 500cm + SWC/m

Instagram @other_strange_creatures
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #32
nzeeman
Registered User
 
nzeeman's Avatar
 
nzeeman is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: belgrade
Age: 39
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Not all 23mm are built equally. Not all lenses in the same focal length are built equally. I thought you guys knew that.
i see this as mocking and aggressive answer...
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #33
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,379
If you aren't getting it with the x100 it is because you are now holding it level. The X100 will absolutely give the same perspective distortion if it is tilted.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #34
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,948
I think from a practical perspective, you might be better off using a full frame camera which will allow you to use a less wide angle lens to get the same angle of view with less of what you are perceiving (and I agree) as distortion.

I understand the technical arguments here and they are probably technically correct.

However I also get that to you the images don't look right. Because a 23mm lenses feels distorted where a 35mm lens would feel more "normal" and less distorted.

This bugs me about APS-C and smaller also.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #35
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
I think from a practical perspective, you might be better off using a full frame camera which will allow you to use a less wide angle lens to get the same angle of view with less of what you are perceiving (and I agree) as distortion.

I understand the technical arguments here and they are probably technically correct.

However I also get that to you the images don't look right. Because a 23mm lenses feels distorted where a 35mm lens would feel more "normal" and less distorted.

This bugs me about APS-C and smaller also.
Sorry, but this is nonsense. Please convince yourself with a comparison of different formats with lenses with identical fov shot side by side.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #36
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
I think from a practical perspective, you might be better off using a full frame camera which will allow you to use a less wide angle lens to get the same angle of view with less of what you are perceiving (and I agree) as distortion.

I understand the technical arguments here and they are probably technically correct.

However I also get that to you the images don't look right. Because a 23mm lenses feels distorted where a 35mm lens would feel more "normal" and less distorted.

This bugs me about APS-C and smaller also.
Thanks. Will try FF.
There are several lens reviews about this specific Fujifilm XF 23mm lens that point in the same direction and they mention the "higher order" distortion issue that can be only partially corrected with PS or other external software.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #37
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Thanks. Will try FF.
There are several lens reviews about this specific Fujifilm XF 23mm lens that point in the same direction and they mention the "higher order" distortion issue that can be only partially corrected with PS or other external software.
You get tons of good advice (and some ridicule..) and choose to listen only to the one person who says buying more gear is the solution? Suit yourself. This is an expensive and slow way to learn, but I suppose it will work. Or you could learn about perspective. Pay some attention to what your own eyes see. If that's not enough, there are lots of resources on the internet and in libraries, some for photographers, probably more for drawing.
Do you know what theses higher order distortions are? If there are any, they wouldn't be visible in the examples you posted. But in any case they are automatically corrected in camera for JPEGs and in LR for lenses that LR has profiles for (like this one, I'm sure). These reviews were likely written when the lens first came out and there were no LR profiles yet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #38
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
You get tons of good advice (and some ridicule..) and choose to listen only to the one person who says buying more gear is the solution?

In all fairness to the many helpful replies, the OP got many replies filled with careful and correct explanations (that perspective distortion is not a lens distortion). The OP then ignored all this and said that the X100 didn’t have perspective distortion. Then said they’d try a bigger sensor to fix the “problem”. Then there might have been a teeny tiny bit of lighthearted well meaning ridicule.
There is a book by Amael Adams where he explains perspective and lens distortions very well called The Camera. He used LARGE FORMAT to get rid of it. Why stop at full frame?
__________________
Cheers,
Michael

Last edited by michaelwj : 04-05-2019 at 06:08. Reason: Trimmed the quote
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #39
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by bushwick1234 View Post
Thanks. Will try FF.
There are several lens reviews about this specific Fujifilm XF 23mm lens that point in the same direction and they mention the "higher order" distortion issue that can be only partially corrected with PS or other external software.
The curvature that isn’t in your images is the most basic distortion (actually the only true lens distortion). So called “higher order” distortions aren’t actually distortions, but aberrations and include coma, astigmatism, spherical and chromatic aberration.
The distortion that is visible in your image is called perspective distortion and has nothing to to with the lens and everything to do with the angle the picture was taken at (as in not at normal incidence to the object).
You definitely should try full frame. I hear it is excellent, and you know what they say about a fool and their money...
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #40
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,379
If you have the same FOV and the same distance from the subject you don't get a difference in perspective distortion because of sensor size.

A FF 35mm would have the same perspective distortion as a 23mm lens on APS-C at the same distance from the subject.

DOF would be different though if shot at the same aperture.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:30.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.