Interesting that the SIF says of the 21/3.5 "Aberration compensation is
well balanced and the lens features superb image quality even at close
focusing distances."
Actually, Jochen's f3.5 results don't surprise me. I can't imagine
shooting a map wide open at close focus of a superwide and expecting
sharp results However, the f8 image is pretty poor as well, even the
center doesn't look great, while f16 is suddenly sharp and snappy. If it
were my lens, I would be wondering if the lens, camera body and/or my
eyes were leading to slight misfocus which is finally corrected for by
DOF by f16. Of course, we don't know if all these shots were focused the
same on a tripod with only the f-stop changed or hand held and all
focused separately, which might account for the f8 result.
Moose
M. Lloyd wrote:
The 21/3.5 I have also has very bad edge resolution at
f3.5 close up. I doesn't have that problem at infinity
and at f8 it follows Gary's test closely in that it's
tack sharp.
I have gotten very good closeup results with this
lens, however, since the blurriness is not noticeable
to about 500ff center and anthing in the center is
sharp so it highlights things in the center while a
flat field macro keep everything sharp. Also stopping
the lens down to f11-16 improves edge performance
dramatically to the point of being virtually
unnoticable at 4x6.
< 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 >
|