Joel Wilcox wrote:
>Thanks for that, Mark. The "look" of the 50/3.5 version is what I am used
>to, but I was too lazy to do what you did. It is surprising to me that the
>camera's WB algorthm doesn't render both exactly the same, since the only
>peek it gets is through the glass.
>
Not really, to quote dpreview because it was quicker to find thanan
online E-1 manual, "the E-1 has automatic white balance which it
implements using a combination of information from its external white
balance sensor and captured image data."
I know I've read about situations where the external WB sensor gets
tricked by being in light quite different from the subject and throws WB
off.
>At least we know that there is a "glass factor" in the color palette.
>
>Ags and I had some offlist discussion about quasi-macro use of the
>14-54. I had some initial shots at 54mm that rendered absolutely terrible
>bokeh. Pulled back to about 35mm and closely focused the bokeh was
>beautiful. The lens is a little mysterious. We've also experienced the
>vignetting at the long end that was discussed a couple weeks ago.
>
Might be interesting to try the Lens Shading compensation. It adds about
20+ seconds to write time for SHQ JPEG, but that wouldn't matter for a
macro setup test. No penalty for RAW shooting and if you have Oly
Studio, the shading compensation can be done there.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|