GH5 GH5S with Leica 100-400mm, Soft Images, Pt 2

B

blando3

Well-known member
Here is a new thread regarding the footage quality shot with my GH5S and Leica 100-400mm.

I saw this hawk up the street and grabbed some footage of it, and as you can see it's just not sharp! I was at 400mm, f6.3, ISO 2000, 24p, NON-VFR mode, using a single clear UV filter. About 40 minutes from sunset so light wasn't good; flat and muddy. As you can see I rack back and forth a few times and finally settle on what looked good in the viewfinder, but it's just lousy looking to me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ2XdmStCDk&feature=youtu.be

Here are two other shots that I like more:

f/10 (I think), 400mm, clear UV, non vfr, 24p (Ignore the dust mark on the left side. it's gone now)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO0biguG-zo&feature=youtu.be

And this one, 60p, f/10 or 11, 100mm. Critical focus is on the license plate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DkksgN_Zs&feature=youtu.be

So is it me? The lens? Or just the difficulty of shooting moving animals at a long distance?
There is a small dust spec on the inside of the rear element. Super frustrating but maybe not the culprit.
Thanks again everyone for thoughts, suggestions, and support.
-Andrew
 
Update: I'm now seeing a recurring issue. Some of my shots have a distinct ghosting or double image of the out-of-focus objects. You can see some vertical blades of grass in the foreground that are doubling/ghosting/not-sure-of-the-term instead of just a gentle blurring. This is most evident in the zoomed in shots, although even some of my wider shots have a crappy fuzziness on the soft foreground and background. I tried this lens with my GH4 and got the same result. Below is a link to what I shot today. The shots aren't special, but they just demonstrate this issue. Below that link is some footage I shot of weasels 6 months ago with the same setup when I first got it, and it looks amazing by comparison.

There is a spec on the rear element that won't come off from either cleaning or air, which leads me to think it's on the inside, and for all I know could be a scratch. No idea how it got there or when. Thoughts on what to do? I'd appreciate any advice.
Thanks!

Shot today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwUuj2RSYzM&feature=youtu.be

Shot 6 months ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcRzdpWRims
 
You will lose resolution to diffraction effects with the M43 system as the iris closes down beyond F5.6, but mostly I think in 6 months it will look as good as it did 6 months ago. It's winter, vegetation loses color. The sun is lower on the horizon, the light is not as warm, the scene is not as colorful. The weasels were adorable but that was 6 months ago, the weather was warm, the grass green, the rays golden. Now the light is flat, cold, ugly and that plays into the perception. The Pontiac looked pretty good to me, and considering at F10 that's all you need to know as for why it feels soft, which it is not. The hawk I think could have been slightly out of focus, you're shooting the 35mm equivalent of 800 mm with a zoom. I don't own the lens and read where one tester said it wasn't sharp, but the images I've seen look pretty good from it.

I think you should not panic.
 
Also, if you are going to shoot 4096x2160, don't make it worse by letting YouTube rescale it to 3840x2160. Crop the sides in your edit so it plays pixel perfect 1:1.

Same advice for GH5s electronic stabilization, it crops the sensor, loses resolution. However you supported the lens in the wind on the weasel shot was steady.
 
Last edited:
I've used a clear UV filter since the moment I unboxed it.
Tom, I appreciate your input, but do you really think that nothing is wrong with the lens? What about the weird blurring of those blades of grass and the vertical striations? Regardless of the winter light, that seems like an optics issue, doesn't it?

I feel like there's something wrong with the lens. Maybe that dust flake or whatever it is on the rear element. I've shot lots of footage from all times of year, and haven't experienced this. And most of that weasel footage was shot at f/10-f/16, 4096 x 2160, and in variable frame rate, too.
 
I'd like to run a few more tests. Should I perhaps swap the clear filter for an ND 4 or ND 8, and then shoot at f/6 and 3840x2160?
 
blando3 said:
And most of that weasel footage was shot at f/10-f/16, 4096 x 2160, and in variable frame rate, too.
Click to expand...
f/10 is pusing it but I think f/16 is way too small. Remember it is mft not a full frame setting you use!
Lens diffraction will kill resolution and lens "dirt" and other unevenness will become more prevalent as well.
 
Cary, the better footage was shot at f/12 and above. What worries me is that now, shooting at f/11 and below, the footage looks like crap. I personally don’t think it’s because it’s winter. What would a blemish on the rear element do to the footage? Is it possible this is the culprit?
 
I'd definitely do some testing with & without your filter. I had a clear UV filter on a long lens of mine & had horrible out of focus areas. Sort of like diagonal lines is the best i could describe it. I tried without the filter, & wouldn't you know it, those horrible our of focus issues were gone.
 
blando3 said:
I've used a clear UV filter since the moment I unboxed it.
Tom, I appreciate your input, but do you really think that nothing is wrong with the lens? What about the weird blurring of those blades of grass and the vertical striations? Regardless of the winter light, that seems like an optics issue, doesn't it?

I feel like there's something wrong with the lens. Maybe that dust flake or whatever it is on the rear element. I've shot lots of footage from all times of year, and haven't experienced this. And most of that weasel footage was shot at f/10-f/16, 4096 x 2160, and in variable frame rate, too.
Click to expand...

I didn't see the ghosting before, wasn't looking in the right place. You might try to see if it reproduces without the filter and opening up the iris, shooting the still pictures as Sam suggested. If it is a decentering issue, should also try, seeing if the zoom direction affects, near to a stopping point, far to a stopping point, (not back and forth), same for focus.

I fully understand how it's possible to obsess when finding something like this, since it's not mine can't really say how bothered I would be but I still think the footage can look nice with it. That said, high magnification zoom lenses have lots of movement and parts, more costly too, should probably be treated more delicately than others.

Try the zoom and focus tests. What happens (I think) is the linear drive mechanism is located on just one side of the moving elements, some play on the opposite side could develop there or has to be built in to accommodate temperature and variances.

I remember there is a lens rental house that was publishing data on their lens repair experience, and they concluded (obviously) that more repairs are needed the more complicated the lens design.
 
Well I’ve had the clear filter on the whole time, so I’m going to guess that’s not the issue, but I’ll test it out. Any suggestions on what to shoot? A grid of some sort maybe? These double-vision issues seem to occur horizontally, do they’re most noticeable with vertical objects like grass.
 
I have one too but I've never used it with a filter other than a deep ND. Ghosting on long lenses with filters seems to be fairly commonplace and I'll guess it might show up infrequently enough to mislead regarding the source. Here's an old post from a bird photographers forum: http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/36273-Canon-100-400-Ghosting-problems

Two problems were presented. One was a sharpness issue and the second was the ghosting. I seem to also recall some complaints about a long zoom and filters resulting in a sharpness issue. For a high quality filter that would appear to be a non-intuitive result, but maybe shoot a resolution chart with and without for peace of mind. I would want to know for sure that it wasn't contributing to the problem and it's just one more variable if it's left in place - maybe use the e-shutter and fire remotely to mitigate vibration variables.
 
Okay, I went out and shot a test with my ND 4, then UV filter, then no filter.
The ND creates a horizontal streaking in the blurry parts. The UV creates the vertical double ghosting. With no filter both problems appear to be gone.
I tried another UV filter with the same result as the prior UV. And I tried an ND8 with the same result as the ND4.
But what does this mean? I can't use a filter on this lens?

I'm still hung up on the spec on the rear element. Is it possible that has rendered this lens incompatible with filters somehow? When I first got this lens, I used it with a clear filter, and I'm pretty sure an ND at times, too, and the results were terrific.
So something has changed. Any other tests I should run? I think this footage is pretty indisputable.

What do people think? Is it worth sending it to Panasonic? Are there any lens technicians in SF that people can recommend?

Thanks, and Happy New Year!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II255IHFSQI&feature=youtu.be
 
I would take it to sammys camera and have the guys look at it see what they say. I would advise to use a Polarizer filter one that lens rather than ND's and UVs. The polarizer will ND a little enabling you to shoot at 5.6-8 in most situations and the polarizer does a good job of cleaning up haze, reflections intensifying colors all in all the image will benefit.




blando3 said:
Okay, I went out and shot a test with my ND 4, then UV filter, then no filter.
The ND creates a horizontal streaking in the blurry parts. The UV creates the vertical double ghosting. With no filter both problems appear to be gone.
I tried another UV filter with the same result as the prior UV. And I tried an ND8 with the same result as the ND4.
But what does this mean? I can't use a filter on this lens?

I'm still hung up on the spec on the rear element. Is it possible that has rendered this lens incompatible with filters somehow? When I first got this lens, I used it with a clear filter, and I'm pretty sure an ND at times, too, and the results were terrific.
So something has changed. Any other tests I should run? I think this footage is pretty indisputable.

What do people think? Is it worth sending it to Panasonic? Are there any lens technicians in SF that people can recommend?

Thanks, and Happy New Year!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II255IHFSQI&feature=youtu.be
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top