----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Norton"
> You are absolutely correct in that my own personal experience is mostly
> limited to a particular camera, but there are certain tell-tails that I've
> learned to identify and can identify them in other digital cameras,
> including the full-frame 35mm ones. It's a physics thing which governs all
> in-camera sensors.
>
> Less you think I'm being critical of digital, I'm not. I consider the
> bokeh
> of the 100/2.8 on digital to be somewhat flawed. Is this the fault of the
> digital sensor? I believe the digital capture mechanism along with
> several
> other factors have changed the game as to what is required of the lens
> optics. How could the engineers that designed the Zuiko 100/2.8 back in
> the
> early 1970's know how a digital sensor was going to react? This may be the
> governing force behind why MF sensors typically have no AA filters or
> microlenses so they may maintain maximum compatibility and consistency
> with
> legacy MF lenses.
>
Even you are not critical on digital but the E-1 is really low in
resolution, together with the 4/3 size your experience on digital could have
big different with the one with high resolution FF sensor. I'm not sure if
microlenses and AA filters has anything to do with bokeh, this elements are
affecting the micro level (resolution) while the bokeh is a much bigger
stuff.
> The fact is, my 100/2.8 isn't alone. What about the Zuiko 35/2 which is
> glorious on film but causes that hot spot in the center of the image on
> digital? Or consider the Zuiko 200/4 which isn't exactly a top-dog lens on
> the OM system, but totally surpasses all expectations when attached to a
> digital body. Or the 35/shift which is also marginally sharp on film, but
> becomes near legendary on digital? The Zuiko 24/2.8, which is terrific on
> film is a beast to get sharp on digital.
I use the 35/2 a lot for family shots, while it was good but never
exceptional, I have tried it on digital it was also good starting at F4.
Same for the 200/4, I don't know how it surpasses your expectations but sure
not me. It do better with E-1 could be due to lower shutter vibration and no
stop down mechanism movement, they can cause serious trouble with OM 200/4.
For the 35 shift my sample is very sharp on film, I found the same with
digital, here is a 4000dpi scan with my 35 shift at F4 or F5.6:
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/35shift-01.jpg
I don't own the 24/2.8 anymore but you don't get sharp image on digital is
easy to understand, a 24/2.8 is very hard to focus on the tiny viewfinder. I
have changed my impressions on my Zuikos on digital since getting liveview,
a lot of problem were actually came from focusing.
>
> I've also used the term "film" generically. Even among types of film (E-6,
> C41 color, B&W) there are huge variations in how a film will react to the
> image being projected on it. If you look at the MTF curves you'll see
> that
> Provia, for example, is high resolving and fine grained, but at the 70%
> point, you'll see that Provia (and Velvia) are actually quite lackluster
> performers. Most ISO 100 and 160 print films will outperform Provia on the
> MTF curves!
>
I don't know how you compare slide with negative, what MTF you are talking
about? 10lp/mm or 30lp/mm, you are talking about local contrast or
resolution? I usually use Velvia for resolution test, I remember it resolve
around 80lp/mm, if my memory serve me well no color negative run better.
> If you want to see just how variable film, subject and optics can be,
> consider this photograph from a past TOPE:
>
> http://www.millennics.com/olympus/tope/tope_show_entry.php?event=14&pic=24
>
> What we have is a high-speed, grainy, B&W film with a textured subject and
> even some unusual things caused by the mixture of motion and the grain.
>
> Would this photograph looked differently with a different film or digital
> sensor? Of course! Then why does it surprise any of us when we see
> variations in bokeh between digital cameras and film cameras?
You have tried to change the bokeh topic to many other different ones. Your
comment on bokeh surprise me because it does not match my experience, I have
seen similar OOF performance with Zuiko on film and FF digital.
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/
|
