Interesting. I don't know how I could have missed that before other
than my general tendency to sometimes be wholly unobservant of the most
obvious things (my wife will tell you). But I'm not yet convinced
because I know of no optical phenomenon of the "crippled" lens which
should cause what looks like a shadow cast on the flower. But that
doesn't mean there isn't one. I just don't know about it.
These were taken by natural light with about 10 minutes in between so
it's possible something is casting a shadow that wasn't before.
Chuck Norcutt
Amin Sabet wrote:
> Even in the thumbnail versions, it seems clear to me that the first
> one (the one on the left) is the one with the black tape. The 100%
> crop avoids the most affected area, which is a a sizeable dark area a
> bit more than 2/3 up and just left of center. -Amin Sabet
>
> On Jan 8, 2008 8:45 PM, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Ah, yes, the giant dust spec test.
>> <http://www.chucknorcutt.com/dust%20spec%20test/index.htm>
>> Both of these shots were taken with an A1 which has a front element
>> approximately the size of a Zuiko 50/1.8. One shot was taken normally.
>> The other is the same except that there is a piece of black
>> electrical tape approximately 3/4" square (19mm) stuck on the front
>> element. Since the front element is about 40mm in diameter the tape was
>> blocking about 29% of the glass area.
>>
>> The third shot is a comparison of the 1:1 pixel level detail from both
>> images. Can you tell which one is which?\
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|