Thanks for the compliments! Don't know what this guy is or what he
does, but I set him free after I blinded him a few times. The scans are
from prints, and thus are pretty low quality.
As you can see from the other macro stuff that I just posted, most of my
subjects have already met their maker and have donated their bodies to
science. Sadly the wasp was severely underexposed (bellows factor -
DOH!), but still workable. I also forgot to mention that a larger
version of the images is available if you click on the image. I also
have the scans at full size (and any size in-between) if anyone is
interested.
The 50/2 certainly is a great lens, but as one can see from MA-PL-002
the 50/1.4 is just plain crap next to it. For *my* ultimate 50mm I have
settled on the 50/3,5. it is compact and sharp enough to mate well with
the 85/2 and 28/2, but I am sure going to miss those extra stops! While
the 50/2 is top notch, it is not for me. Maybe one day when I have the
$ to burn, but for now I have to resist temptation. It would mean
getting rid of the 135/4.5 and 80/4, and I am not prepared to do that
quite yet. In shooting some details of paintings, I found the 50/2 to
be a bit sharper than the 135/4.5, but the working distance is much
better for smaller work (which is the current subject).
Thanks again for all the feedback, and keep 'em comin'!
Bob
< 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 >
|