12-27-2010, 04:13 PM
In contrast (ha ha), I could claim that Klaus's current vignetting analysis, the EV numbers, is too much information. All I really want to know is a few words on whether or not, at a given aperture, most of my photos are going to have noticeable corner darkening. On the camera being tested. The reader would do well to look at a lot of different 'zone reports to get a feel for what is reasonably achievable.
The wisdom to extrapolate from the tested camera to any other particular camera, and a zillion other variables has, to come from the reader thinking about their particular work and hardware. Does the reader's camera indeed have microlenses with tuned orientation? Is the scene going to have overall contrast boosted? Accurately predicting the final significance would be so dependent on image content, post-processing and/or contrast settings. For example, every one of my own photos gets its contrast boosted an unknowable-beforehand amount by my Picture Window Pro's command to stretch the luminances to occupy the "full range" of possible brightnesses.
The Photozone vignetting reports, which always have a few words of discussion/perspective on the practical significance of the charts, strike a pretty good balance between thoroughness and conciseness. Am always happy to hear whether or not the reviewers think that compensation is happening in camera firmware.
Well, it is interesting when some other reviewers give a hint as to whether or not the transition to darkening is sudden or gradual, perhaps with a sample photo of a gray wall. But even that is only important when the absolute amount of corner darkening is high. Let us note that if you start down that road, you'd have to show a different chart/photo for each aperture (and perhaps for "each" zoom focal length). The benefit of taking up time and space on the topic is arguable.
In general, am not sure what other aspect of testing I would like the Photozone to cut corners on (?), in order to tweak a part of the work that is already nice.
The wisdom to extrapolate from the tested camera to any other particular camera, and a zillion other variables has, to come from the reader thinking about their particular work and hardware. Does the reader's camera indeed have microlenses with tuned orientation? Is the scene going to have overall contrast boosted? Accurately predicting the final significance would be so dependent on image content, post-processing and/or contrast settings. For example, every one of my own photos gets its contrast boosted an unknowable-beforehand amount by my Picture Window Pro's command to stretch the luminances to occupy the "full range" of possible brightnesses.
The Photozone vignetting reports, which always have a few words of discussion/perspective on the practical significance of the charts, strike a pretty good balance between thoroughness and conciseness. Am always happy to hear whether or not the reviewers think that compensation is happening in camera firmware.
Well, it is interesting when some other reviewers give a hint as to whether or not the transition to darkening is sudden or gradual, perhaps with a sample photo of a gray wall. But even that is only important when the absolute amount of corner darkening is high. Let us note that if you start down that road, you'd have to show a different chart/photo for each aperture (and perhaps for "each" zoom focal length). The benefit of taking up time and space on the topic is arguable.
In general, am not sure what other aspect of testing I would like the Photozone to cut corners on (?), in order to tweak a part of the work that is already nice.