George Anderson wrote:
>I just wanted to pass on something that surprised me.
>
>Sunday night, as a test, I made a 16 x 20 print from a 35mm slide.
>This particular slide was taken with an 'S' series Zuiko, one of
>the 'bad performers' in Gary Reese's tests, the 100-200/5 zoom.
>the resulting print is quite acceptable. Much better than I had hoped.
>
>I guess the moral is: Don't dis a Zuiko S.
IMHO, the 100-200/f5 zoom has physical characteristics which are very
similar to the 200/f4 lens, and hence in Gary R.'s test results it
may have suffered the same fate. IOW, the 100-200/f5 test may need
to be repeated, this time -- with an extra lens support, mirror lock,
etc.
Furthermore, several people, including yours truly, had mentioned that
they get very nice results with the various "body + 200mm lens/zoom"
rigs -- handheld, while the same rigs disappoint when shot from a tripod.
It occurs to me that should the culprit be some secondary harmonic in
such a rig, a rigid mount like a tripod may actually amplify it, whereas
a "soft mount" which is the human body -- attenuates it. (This is just
a hunch! I did not perform any formal analysis, so pls -- no flames).
Cheers,
/Gary Schloss.
Studio City, California, USA
schloss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|