Ok, just found an old shot with the 50/1.2 (most likely shot at F1.2 or F2),
sorry for the color cast as the film was poorly processed:
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/5012-01.jpg
Look at the OOF highlight you will see the bokeh is not really pleasing. I
also have test shots compare 35-70/3.6 and 50/1.2 but take time to find out.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "C.H.Ling"
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the images, here are the one that looks good but one just can't
confirm it with one image. Bokeh is relative, no easy measurement data, you
need to compare them.
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/Openair_bed_small.jpg
This one I can't vote for good bokeh:
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/Treson_small.jpg
For close up I have one from 50/1.4 that I believe is better.
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_0214.JPG
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Irisarri" <div2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] So what Zuiko is the true Bokeh Champ?
Hmmmm,
I don´t agree about 50 1.2 bad bokeh. I also used to had one when I had
OM4T and 80% of my shots were made with it. Despite of being soft wide
open, bokeh was charming and pleasant. I send you a picture of a lovely
charming bokeh of it. Maybe you can put it in your website for Dawid
Loubser.
Regards,
Dave
> Ok, here is bokeh samples from some 50mm and 85-100mm lenses, for the long
> one I can't see any difference on their bokeh except the 75-150 at ~100mm
> which seems to have more DOF. For the 50mm, the one with best bokeh is
> 50/1.4 MC and the poorest one is 50/3.5 MC macro.
>
> They are around 3MB each, you can download and compare them. Besides
> bokeh,
> you can also see the center resolution.
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3693_852F2.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3694_852F4.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3695_902F2.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3696_902F4.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3697_1002F2.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3698_1002F4.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3705_75150F4.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3700_5014F2.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3701_5014F4.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3702_5035F35.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3703_50M2F2.JPG
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/bokeh/IMG_3704_50M2F4.JPG
>
> Concerning your question about the 50/1.2, sorry I have sold it long ago
> due
> to the poor bokeh. Yes... it is even poorer than the 50/3.5 at portrait
> distance.
>
> C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
