Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> A week or so ago I said I intended to test my new Tokina 28-80/2.8 on my
> 5D against OM mount lenses. ...............
I too have been doing a little lens testing, partly as a result of some
poor results in my early random shots with different lenses.
I have yet to get a first class result with the Kiron 105/2.8. The iris
pics I posted the other day were part of series trying out OM mount
macro lenses. I think part of my problem is that I've adjusted over the
last couple of years to the DOF behavior of an APS sized sensor. So my
sense of how small an aperture to use and where to focus with FF are
off. More testing will reveal more.
I've also had some poor results that seemed to me to be focus problems
with AF lenses. I took some landscape shots with the Tamron 28-300 at
longer fls, both auto and manual focused that would fit your description
of not acceptable. What particularly disturbed me was that I knew that
lens pretty well on the 300D and it seemed at first look that it was
much worse on the 5D. A closer look showed that the problem might be
inadequate DOF and incorrect focal plane. Perhaps the wider FOV on the
5D was tending to include more subject elements, with some at closer
distances than the narrower view of the 300D.
So a couple of days ago, I went out with tripod and the two camera
bodies with QR plates to a place where I could take easily swap bodies
and lenses for landscape shots with true infinity at any fl I had.
There, full pixel resolution sharpness and detail proved to be
essentially the same on both bodies, and I'm still pretty happy with the
28-300, even with full frame coverage.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/GGB01.htm>
There very subtle differences on some subjects seeming to be mostly
subtle differences in the true plane of focus; one would be a bit
sharper in one part and the other in another part at a slightly
different part of the image and a different distance away. The tests
also pointed out what a big factor sharpness and contrast settings make
on the different bodies. I really need to reprocess the RAW images with
more comparable settings, rather than just the camera settings, which
were obviously different.
I also took a bunch of shots with the 50/1.8, 24-85 and 19-35, but like
yours, my eyes get tired of peering at comparisons. In my case, I also
get bored after a while and my attention wanders. In any case, I am
reassured that they all focus properly, so my concerns about possible AF
problems are allayed and I can get on with life and picture taking.
My conclusion is that I need to pay more attention to technique and
relearn DOF for FF.
I still am interested in making some comparisons of the AF lenses to
Zuiko primes, but I will pace myself....
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|