Hi all
Yesterday I scanned two Kodachromes I shot a couple of years ago, using a
OM1 on a heavy tripod, and self-timer with mirror lock-up.
The subject was a yellow flag iris flower.
Two lenses were used; Panagor 50mm f/2.8 which can go to 1:1; and the
Zuiko 100/2 which will go as close as 70cm.
The images were almost the same size, but the Zuiko shot was slightly
smaller.
My clear impression is that the Panagor shot is sharper.
Following the rationale of Gary Reese expressed on his lens-test site, I think
that this results from the glass of the Panagor being MUCH closer to the
camera body than the glass of the Zuiko. So that the vibration of the aperture
stop-down to f/16 (Panagor) and f/22 (Zuiko) had a greater effect on the
significantly longer lens. Shutter speed in both cases was about 1 second.
I also have been taking shots for the current TOPE, and the first image back
(end of last roll) showed me what a challenge it is to use a long macro. In
this case the Sigma 90mm f/2.8. Shallow DOF, and a great need to have
the major plane of the subject parallel to the plane of the film.
I also got back some shots taken with my 21 yr old son using lenses I gave
him, during a session intended to generate some enthusiasm and impart
some basics. One of these is the Kiron 80-200 tele-macro. It seems quite
sharp and versatile - but - Oh such a shallow depth of field on macro. And if
you stop down, the shutter speed is very slow.
Brian
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|