According to my experience and modern photography test result Zuiko 90/2 is
not a very sharp lens at close distance and your sample has low contrast and
very shallow DOF so very hard to judge. Here is an example at 4000dip no
sharpen, looks a little better in sharpness (for the part in focus). Please
also
note it is a 4000dpi scan, you can't directly compare with your E-1 shoot.
You should resample your E-1 shot to make it the same size as the 4000dpi
one.
http://www.accura.com.hk/P_16.jpg
BTW, I agree with your comment about my sample, it has obvious flash effect
(reflections) but for this kind of shoots you cannot use tripod and there is
not possible to shoot without flash unless you have confidence to handhold
at less than 1/10s. For most insect shoots you need flash, that is life and
it can be done better if you have a good setup.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne S" <om4t@xxxxxxxx>
> Yes, I agree completely. I was just venting some frustration about
> getting good macro results with the OM and scanning. Scanning is
> certainly a weak point with film, but worth it if everything works.
> There is a softness to the focus of my scans. I'm beginning to think it
> is in part the scanner. I have noticed that my LS-4000 scanner gives a
> rotated (0.5 degrees) and a slightly trapezoidal shape to the slide
> frame, implying that the mirror is slightly off. I'm not sure if that
> should affect focus though. My thought was that a tilted scanner mirror
> would not give good focus across the frame? I have no problem getting
> good focus with the camera, unless the camera mirror itself is off.
> Even with the E-1, while manual focusing, I can hear the stepper motor
> clicking softly, and I can usually tell focus between +/- 1 click.
> I'm going to try Vuescan and check the focus at various points...
> If you look at the grain in this full resolution shot (1.8mb) you can see
> that it is stretched/blurry top and bottom, but perhaps not enough
> to account for all the soft focus??:
>
> http://www.zuik.net/om/rvp3b_10_18_03_vs22a.jpg
> (I think 90/2 with OM-4t, speed in that bad range, maybe 135/4.5?)
> Am I expecting too much from film?
>
> I rarely use flash with macro as I often don't like the results I get,
> harsh with black background, shinny highlights, and high contrast.
> Although I never got around to trying cross polarization with the
> flash. I much prefer natural light, which can be more diffuse, add
> color during the magic hour, and the effect and color the background can
> give. Unfortunately that also restricts shots with motion issues, wind,
> vibration, etc. Flash resulting in a natural looking macro is certainly an
art.
>
> That's a cool shot BTW, but still it has those flash artifacts I don't
like.
>
> Wayne
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
