No offense, but this is pretty much a meaningless comparison. There are too
many factors - were you using a tripod? What shutter speed? Or may be he is
not as steady? Or ...?
Besides, the 50/1.8 prime is probably generally the sharpest lens from any
manufacturers. That's the one that "everybody" uses.
At 11:26 PM 4/4/2002 -0800, you wrote:
I recently took some of my favorites slides in for scanning. One of them,
a photo of some crotons in front of a window on a house in Hawaii, was
taken in 1984 at about 5:30 am with available light with Kodachrome 64 (it
was taken with a black nose, single coated 50 mm f/1.8). I haven't
uploaded a scan of this to my pbase gallery because the scan just doesn't
seem to do justice to the slide (not that any of them do, but this one
seems worse than the others in that respect). Anyway, its a very nice
still life shot that I have gotten many positive comments on over the
years. I was showing it to a co-worker friend the other day who has
recently bought a Canon EOS3 with two zoom lenses; one of them is a
28-70mm, I believe (?). Anyway, when he viewed the slide the other day in
the little Agfa viewer, he was just knocked out at the sharpness of the
photograph and remarked that photos from his Canon lenses just don't look
like that (he has been shooting with Fuji Provia 100, I might add). I have
heard him make similar comments about these zooms before, but is this
possible? I would have thought that Canon's years of R&D and resources in
20 years or greater would have resulted in superior sharpness, but
apparently not(?).
...
// richard http://www.imagecraft.com
[ For technical support, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ]
< 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 >
|