Mark, do you custom WB for the OM lenses? Ideally, WB should be reset
every time *any* variable (lens, lighting, filter, etc.) changes.
I've noticed obvious differences between my lenses. Anyone know how
well the characteristics of the OMs are matched?
I also find myself wondering if your adapter is within tolerance,
especially if the OM lenses provide "gorgeous results . . . on Provia
F".
Can you describe what is "missing" in the OM digishots?
FWIW/ScottGee1
On Apr 1, 2005 2:24 PM, Mark Dapoz <md@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 iwert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > And the OM-adaptor is REALLY worth the wait. The Digital Zuiko's are, well,
> > digital I suppose. Nice, but. The overall impression of my pictures till
> > now is that the best ones are coming from my "old zuiko's", but this might
> > as well be the larger aperture, shallower DOF.
>
> My experience is the opposite, the new ZD lenses are far better than the
> old OM's on the E-1. The colour balance of the OM lenses is always a bit
> off (real easy to see these days with all the snow around) and they just
> don't seem to be as sharp. I know these OM lenses can do better, we're
> talking lenses like the 35-80/2.8, 100/2, etc. They constantly produce
> gorgeous results for me on Provia F, but when put on the E-1 they just seem
> to lose something. The ZD lenses are much better, but I still think the
> top end OM lenses on Provia produce sharper results. Maybe the ZD 300/2.8
> produces better results, too bad it's so unaffordable.
> -mark
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|