Scott Gomez wrote:
>Chart? :-)
>
>I'd say to try it. As far as I can see you won't hurt anything. Results
>may not be good from what Olympus have said. However, I seem to remember
>some posts not long after availability of the 4/3 adapter that said
>things weren't nearly as bad as Oly intimated.
>
>
That's what I recall too. Quite a few reports of good results outside
the guidelines.
Then there was a thread suggesting that the issue wasn't all, or
possibly even primarily, about optical performance, but to at least a
considerable extent metering. The digi exposure system gets fooled in
some way by MF lenses. I know for the 300D, it tends to overexpose in
auto near wide open, less so in manual. As I recall, the E-1 was the
reverse, tending to undererexpose, and I don't remember reports of
whether there is a difference in auto vs. manual.
But as you say, it doesn't cost anything to try and look at the results.
In any case, digital is the easiest for dealing with exposure issues.
Take a shot, check the histogram, adjust as necessary and shoot again.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|