>I think with a Cokin you can never get the flare effect of a series of
aperture shape.
C.H.Ling
That's almost certainly true, but I think Photoshop would do the job pretty
easily if I ever wanted multiple imaging of a regular shape....
The fact that I don't know is a fair clue to the fact that I'm firmly in the
MC is better camp as far as Zuikos are concerned. My 85/2 MC doesn't
noticeably flare at all. The SC does when pushed. Guess which goes out most
often. Means I can frame a contra - jour shot as I want it framed, not as I
have to frame it to avoid flare or get the ghost images in the right (or
least bad) place.
Some of the SCs are pleasantly surprising. I got a silvernose 16 recently,
and included a flare shot in the test roll, expecting that it would be
completely washed out, given the reputation and dire warnings in the Lens
Handbook and other sources. I was pleased to find flaring to be well
contained around the image of the Sun, and no real overall contrast problem.
Still want an MC one, though. Sorry A.G.
I think the whole question depends on what you expect from a lens. I expect
every one of mine to perform without issue in all circumstances. That means
no flaws acceptable. Evidently not all of them manage this, so they are not
general - purpose lenses, and consequently get limited use.
I have to agree with Mickey, though. Even the worst of my lenses is a more
reliable performer than I am. Overall I'd say the Zuiko glass was rather
more than half full, however.
Julian
< 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 >
|