Hi,
Sorry if I'm a bit late with my reply, spent the weekend listening to (and
photographing) organs in Antwerp. All that while the world final of snooker is
on, talk about dedication.
> Ok, originally I want to perform the test on 50mm first but I now I do it
> for 200mm first, below is the result:
>
> All lenses shoot at F5, around 1/5s, ISO400, custom white balance, no post
> adjustment, no sharpening only resize.
>
> Group A - background to object distance 20 inches, there are some details on
> the background, can you see which lens has poorest bokeh?
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/180F2_8a.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/200F5a.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/200F4a.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/50250a.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/85250a.jpg
Here's my short evaluation in top-5 format:
1) 85-250: nice, even, soft
2) 200/f4: I already don't like this lens too much anymore. It's much more
uneven than the 85-250.
3) 200/f5: a bit worse
4) 180/f2.8: a bit worse than 200/f5
5) 50-250: very rough, almost a double-image of the background.
> Group B - background to object distance 40 inches, the background are more
> blur, can you see which lens has poorest bokeh?
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/180F2_8b.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/200F5b.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/200F4b.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/50250b.jpg
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/bokeh/85250b.jpg
>
> In your example, the background are much more blur, even the poorest lens
> will provide the same result, there is no comparision possible.
I can quite clearly see a difference between the 50-250 and the 85-250, though
it is much more subtle. Take a look at the blue spot in the background, right
next to the paw on the right side of the picture. The 85-250 brings it out
very evenly, quite nice. The picture taken with the 50-250 is very uneven and
"blotty". I don't enjoy it so much. The general impression suffers from this,
it makes me more nervous than the result with the 85-250.
> I'm sorry to put the result here as some lenses owner will be very
> disappointed on their lens once they praise it very much.
Thanks a lot for this test ! If I had ever considered one of the 200mm lenses,
I'll definitely reconsider now ! Having gotten used to the 90/f2 as my
standard lens, I guess I'm spoilt :-)
*Please* add 75-150 and a bunch of 50mm & wide angles and publish this ! It
makes a great document. I'm volunteering to put it on my site, if you don't
have the possibility to do it yourself.
Peter.
< 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 >
|
