> I mention here while is crosses my mind, that I read somewhere
> recently, that the 4/3 adapter is somewhere like 0.1 - 0.3 mm
> too thin.
Better to be too thin than thick. I recall having a lens that
never focused all the way to infinity.
> Actually, I am getting increasingly frustrated with the E-1
> and manual Zuiko lenses; I find it quite difficult to get
> well-exposed shots with it and them (they are usually over-
> exposed), and attaining sharp focus is a real issue.
It does take getting used to. I ran a set of controlled tests
at all apertures and all lenses on my E-1. Anything wider than
F4 will over-expose. Depending on the focal length, anything
beyond F8 will start to skew too. I did a write up on this a
couple months ago with the data. Sometimes it pays to think
manual exposure.
> Elsewhere I have mentioned my frustration with latitude.
Maybe it's a case of us wanting the image to be something beyond
what we "think we want". I learned how to maximize Velvia many
years ago and using the same techniques allows me to preserve
many a highlight. Otherwise, I just accept the fact that
something is going to peak and I just work with it.
> The ranges of suitable f-stops with Zuikos on E-1 are also
> rather limited.
There are good spots and bad spots, but overall I'm pretty
tickled with the majority of my lenses on the E-1. Course, my
herd is pretty limited.
> Features I really like about the E-1 are the near total
> absence of vibration...
I place this up there beyond the dust-shaker in killer-features.
I never had it this good with the OM bodies.
AG
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|