At 5:35 PM +0300 8/23/00, "Omer Nezih Gerek" <ongerek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is, indeed, near photo quality. Then howcome the price is not
outrageous. Consider the lens only, and think of the 35-80/2.8
which is *slower*. The lens itself is very interesting, and I would
like to know its performance on a regular film. There were already
f2 lenses for a couple of digital equipments, but the limits of the digital
sensors were already forgiving the performence of the lens. ut with 4M
pixels, this one should better be a good one.
A good 35-140/2-2.4 would smash the SLR world. Never heard of anything
near...
It's a whole lot easier to make glass this fast when your effective aperture
is only about 15 millimeters. (I assume the 2.4 is at the zoomed end.)
The 4M pixel thing is a little questionable to me, since the pixel size is
still only 3.9 microns. That's less than five wavelengths across for red light,
so the pixels are definitely smaller than the useful resolution of the lens.
(Given the roughly 4x multiplier, that would be "grain size" of about 16
microns, which would mean you want resolution of about 200-300 line pairs
per mm equivalent from the lens to make use of it. I don't think the optics
world has gotten that much better.)
paul
--
Paul Wallich pw@xxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|