To all, thanks for your comments.
I took another look at the photos where I had focussing problems. They
were candid shots of people at a party. Where the subjects were out of
focus, I noticed that the area just behind them was in focus (and it was
a narrow band that was in focus) and very sharp. What I think happened
is that I focussed the camera and then waited for the right moment. The
people, while seated, were moving forward and back (leaning back against
the chair backs, or sitting forward). This movement was enough to move
them out of focus IF I didn’t refocus before taking the picture.
I also had a look at the lens again. At a distance of 8ft and f22 the
DOF is just under 8ft to maybe 9ft+, so close up there is not much to
play with.
All to say, I am not going to give up on the lens.... Sorry Gordon! Also
Gordon, we have Alberta weather today (-35-ish with the wind chill). For
those south of the 49th, that is cold in both celsius and fahrenheit. I
see you’re looking for a 100/2. My experience this year is that they do
appear on Ebay (maybe 12 or so this year) and the reasonable price range
is US$450-600. Vintage Visuals had one recently (and briefly) for
Can$645, which is a pretty good price for Canada.
Walt Wayman wrote:
>I have and regularly use three 100mm lenses: 100/2 Zuiko with 35mm, 100/2.8
>Zeiss Planar with 6x9cm Graflex XL, and 100/5.6 Schneider APO Symmar with
>6x9cm Crown Graphic. At any given aperture, I am certain, and my experience
>bolsters my certainty, that all three have exactly the same depth of field, or
>depth of focus, whichever you prefer to call it. (Don't confuse me with
>circles of confusion.)
>
>However, it might seem that the two 6x9 lenses have a greater depth of field,
>but that's only because a 6x9 negative or transparency doesn't have to be
>enlarged nearly as much as a 35mm negative or transparency to make an equal
>size print. But if we snip out a 24x36mm section from the center of the 6x9cm
>negative or tranny and blow it up to the same degree as the 35mm, it will look
>exactly the same in terms of depth of field. The more you magnify the
>slightly out of focus parts, of course, the more out of focus they look.
>
>Wait a minute! I think I used this same "snipping out a piece" analogy a
>while back in a discussion about focal length and perspective. But what the
>hell! It applies here too. Focal length is focal length, and aperture has
>the same relation to focal length no matter what the focal length happens to
>be: the hole in the diaphragm has a diameter 1/x the focal length of the lens,
>where x equals the f/number. (Don't confuse me with T-stops.)
>
>I may be wrong, but I'm not really uncertain. However, I await correction.
>Old as I am, I keep learning new stuff and unlearning old stuff I throught I
>knew.
>
>Walt
>
>--
>"Anything more than 500 yards from
>the car just isn't photogenic." --
>Edward Weston
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>From: Fernando Gonzalez Gentile <fgnzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
>>>Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:23:10 -0000
>>>To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Subject: [OM] Re: New member with question about 100/F2
>>>
>>>All 100mm lenses have the
>>>same DoF. It depends how D0F is defined -
>>>
>>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>
>>>(and it is
>>>also showing the shortcomings of a principle (DoF) defined in the 1920s (if
>>>I remember correctly) .
>>>
>>>
>>Could you elaborate or point towards more web published material on this
>>subject, Piers?
>>I supposed that the wider the aperture, the shallower the DOF; the longer
>>the FL, the shallower the DOF.
>>Wrong, isn't it?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Fernando.
>>
>>
>>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>
--
Martin Walters
Natural Resources Canada/Ressources naturelles Canada
Government of Canada/Gouvernement du Canada
580 Booth Street, 10th Floor/580 rue Booth, 10ième étage
Ottawa, Ontario/Ottawa (Ontario)
K1A 0E4
E-mail/Courriel : mwalters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Tel/Tél : (613) 996-4110
Fax/Téléc : (613) 992-5244
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|