William Sommerwerck wrote:
>
> > First it is an anecdote, then I have heard rumors, that the sharpness of
> > lenses for smaller formats can be greater in the area of interest than in
> > greater format lenses, which have to cover the greater format.
>
> "If you compare two lenses, equal in all respects but the size [focal
> length], and say one is 50mm and the other 38, you can easily understand
> how their confusion circles must be one the 38/50 of the other."
>
> The first comment is generally true. The latter is incorrect.
>
> About a year ago, Pop Photo did a 35mm versus 120 shootout. It turned
> out that 35mm lens are generally sharper than 120-format lenses. 35mm
> negatives require higher magnification, so the lenses must be more
> highly corrected.
>
This has been borne out in my experience. My Zuikos are noticably
sharper than my Mamiya 645 lenses are, or my Mamiya TLR lenses were.
Course, the medium format lenses still produce a transparancy that will
blow up a little better.
> There is no law of nature which requires this. However, extra correction
> usually requires additional elements, which would add to the mass and
> bulk of already-large lenses.
>
> Furthermore, within a given format, shorter focal-length lenses _do not_
> have smaller circles of confusion, since the images from such lenses are
> _not_ enlarged more than images from longer lenses.
>
> As to the OM-5... I'll believe it when I see it. I can't believe it's a
> wholly manual camera, because most photographers want switchable auto
> exposure. And if it _does_ have auto exposure, then it would be the
> OM-6.
>
OM, OM, OM. Olympus, phone OM. OM-5, OM-6? I'm thinking, if an OM-5Ti
as described in that msg were available for $1500 (actually, it would
probably be closer to $2000, considering the price of the 3Ti) , would I
buy it? And would I then use it or collect it? Would I really want to
carry a camera of that cost into the field? Course, with 1/250 flash
sync, it opens up a lot of new OM possibilities around the studio etc.
At first I thought, if the flash sync was 1/250th, Oly would need a new
flash. But after considering, I'm convinced any T or F flash would work
since only the shutter would really need to change (ie, move faster).
Would I or wouldn't I? Only my wife knows for sure! :>)
George
PS I would LOVE to see such a camera. Is this just the first
new-Olympus-joke-of-the-year perpetrated on us poor Zuiks? This time by
the Pentax list, of all sources?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|