It makes sense to evaluate it in night mode, but some cameras claim good low light performance in color (day mode) as well. Will you test these lenses in color as well?
Super Low Light HD Lens Tested
Published Jun 26, 2015 04:00 AM
* ******* *-****** *** **** * big ********** ** *** **** ***** reaches ** ******.
*** *******, *** ********** **** ******* a */*.* *** */*.*, ***** *** seem **** *****, *** ** ***********, as ***** ** ****-**** **********:
*******, ****** *** ********* ******* *** ****** of ** ***** */*.*, **** **** at */*.* *** **** **** ***** cost **** ** */*.* ** ******.
** ******** ****** * */*.** *** rated **** **** ********* (*** *******-***). This **** ** ****, ***** ***** in *** ****** ********** ** '******' size ********* ************ ******:
**** *** *** *** ******** **** this ****:
- *** */*.** **** ******** *** ***** performance ** *** ******* ******, *******, the ***** ** *********** *** ********* modest, ********** ******** ** *** ***** of *********** ********* ***** *******.
- ** *** ***** *** *** ******* tested, ******* **** ******** ** ***** light ****** ***** *** */*.** ******** to ***** ******.
- ** *** ***** *** ***** **** model (**** */*.* ****), ******* ***** was *******, ********* ******* *********, ****** image ********** *** **** ******** ********* between ******.
- **** ****** ******** **** *** ** an ***** *** ********** ** ********* selection.
*******
*** *******-*** *** * ****** ***** around $***. **** ** ************* **** expensive **** ******* *-* ********* ***** lenses, ********* ** *** ***** **$***.
***************
** ******** **** *** ***** *********** is ******** *** ****** ** ** issue, *** */*.** *** ******* ******** *********** of ****** ** ***** ****** ***** 1 ***, ********** ** ******* ***** and **.
***** ****** ** ******* **** ********* enclosures *** *** ******* ***** **** lens, ** *** ********* **** ******** to ******** ****** *** ******* * longer *******.
Physical ****
*** ********* */*.** **** ** **** larger **** ******* ********* ***** ******, nearly ****** ** **** ******** *** length. **** **** *** ** * practical ***** **** **** ****** ********, as *** **** *** ******** *** camera *** ****** *** *** ** smaller **********. ************, ** **** *******, aesthetics *** ** * *******.
Low ***** *********** ***********
** ****** *** */*.** ********* **** on ***** ******* ** *** ***** levels ******* **** *.** ** *.* lux ** **** *********** ******* ***** lenses *** *** *** ***** *****. We ****** * ***** ** *******, from **** ** *** ********** ** the *********** *** **** *****:
******* ****** ************
*****, ** ****** *** *******-*** **** a *** ******* ****** ************, * notoriously **** *** ***** *********, **** a **** */*.* *-**** **** (*** UHD45-10). ***** *** * **** **********, ** *** *** *** ********* lens ****** *.** **** ***** **** the ******* *****.
** ~*.** ***, *** ********** ******* the *** ****** ** *****, **** the ****** ********* ** ***** ***** the */*.** ****, ***** ** ****** images *** ******** ***** *** ******* recommended *****-** **** (*/*.*). ** ~*.** lux, *********** *** **** *****, **** the ****** **** ** ****** *** chart ***** *** */*.** ****, *** no ******* *** ********. ** ~*.** lux, ***** ****** *** *** *** to ******* * ****** ***** **** either ****.
**** *****
*** **** ***** ***** **** * 3MP ***** */*.* ****, **** ** pass **** ***** **** *** ***** of *** */*.**.
** *** **** *****, *** ********** in ***** ***** ** ~*.** *** ~0.35 *** ** *****, **** ****** details ** **** ******* *** ***** provided **** ***** *** */*.** ****. At **** *** ***** ******, *** F/0.95 **** ***** ******** ****** ***** legibility, *** *** ***** ** *** dark *** ***** ****** *** **** to ******* ******* ** *** *******.
******* ***-****
*******, *** ******* ***-**** **** * manufacturer *********** */*.* *-**** ****.
** *** ******* ***-****, ******* *** less ********** *** ** *** ****** F ******* ** *** ******, ** well ** *** ******'* ********* *** light ***********. *** **** ********** **** at *** ***** ****** ** ******* digital *****. ** ~*.** *** *** ~0.66, ******* ******* *** **** ****** to ******* ***** *** */*.** ****
Comments (8)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
Jun 26, 2015U
Undisclosed #2
Jun 26, 2015Thanks Ethan. Could you clarify one thing? You said:
A smaller F-number can make a big difference in how low light reaches an imager.
...the difference even between a f/1.2 and f/1.0, which may seem very close, can be significant.
But this seems at odds with the information in the f-stop tutorial:
Small differences in F numbers (e.g., f/1.2 vs f/1.4) generally do not impact low light performance significantly.
Is there a subtle distinction I'm missing?
JH
John Honovich
Jun 26, 2015Yes, statement #1 talks about how much light reaches the imager. Statement #2 refers to how much it impacts performance. Two Different things.
Consider statement #3 inside the report, weighing both:
"The F/0.95 lens improved low light performance of all cameras tested, however, the level of improvement was typically modest, especially relative to the level of theoretical increased light passing."
U
Undisclosed #2
Jun 26, 2015Two Different things.
Let's just talk performance then.
This article says "modestly improving performance"
The tutorial says "not significantly impacting performance"
JH
John Honovich
Jun 26, 2015In this test, we tested F/0.95 vs lenses up to F/1.8, which is much larger than the example we gave in the tutorial, quote "f/1.2 vs f/1.4".
U
Undisclosed #3
Jun 27, 2015Would be interesting to see a depth of field comparison or calculation of the lenses as well.
TC
Trisha (Chris' wife) Dearing
Jun 29, 2015John, does the fact that the Hik lens and the Computar lens have different formats have to be considered? The Computar is listed as a 1/2.7" and the Hik is listed as a larger 1 1/8" format.
This means the diameter of the image circle formed by the lenses is different. For the Computar looks to be around 6.6mm, whereas the Hik should be around 9mm. The 5004's sensor is a 1/3" or 6mm diagonal, so although using a lens with a 1 1/8" format lens is possible, it wastes much more of the light passed by the lens, than the 1/2.7" format:
I didn't look up the other sensor sizes, I just wanted to throw this out for discussion and see if it makes any sense first.
TC
Trisha (Chris' wife) Dearing
Jul 01, 2015Correction: Format type should read 1/1.8", not 1 1/8".
Relative sizes and sizes in mm are unaffected.