Lee Yuan Sheng
05-28-2010, 09:00 AM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.dpreview.com/articles/distortion/' target='_blank'>http://www.dpreview.com/articles/distortion/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"What's more important, the final image or how it's achieved? Over the past year or so, we've encountered an increasing number of cameras with lenses that capture significantly distorted images which are then corrected using in-camera software. It's a process that has divided the forums, with some arguing passionately that it's cheating and that the lenses aren't really as good as they appear, while others maintain that it's the final results that matter, rather than how they're achieved."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1274908712.usr15670.jpg" style="border: 0;" /></p><p>Software correction in this day and age is highly proficient, and correctly done can result in smaller and cheaper lenses with a minimum of image quality loss. Of course, we then get purists screaming bloody murder because said lens doesn't come with two aspherical elements to do the necessary corrections, which is a real pet peeve of mine. dpreview's informal test here shows that the image quality drop off is not as severe as one might think, and that the compromise all but the most critical photographers well.</p><p>The matter of the fact is that the while correcting distortion means stretching out the photo by interpolation, optical correction of distortion can also lead to compromises with lens resolution, and potentially introducing other aberrations. I think it's time we stop determining our purchasing decisions for lenses based on specifications, but rather what they produce in the field. Many working professionals never trusted a lens they never had significant shooting time with for that reason!</p>