It would have been nice to do a more controlled test indoors with flash
(no wind or changing light) but it's difficult to shoot at 40-50 times
focal length indoors in a small house at 300mm (I'll save you the math,
that's 12-15 meters. The 85-250 is clearly softer wide open at 250mm
than the 300/4.5. But the difference narrows pretty quickly on stopping
down. Pixel peeping 12.7MP images not shown here. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
> I doubted long whether to invest money, effort and risk on a 300/4,5. I
> already owned a 85~250/5 and liked it a lot, it performed well enough
> even when coupled to the 2X-A to reach 500mm if the scene was not too
> demanding. Besides, the 200/4 coupled to the 2X-A never really
> disappointed me: I made more errors either when taking the picture or
> when scanning, than those who could be seen when I nailed both. I needed
> good reasons, and Gary's test didn't provide them. Ken's enthusiasm kept
> me interested, and finally I found what seemed to be a nice late sample
> of a 300/4,5. It was worth waiting for an MC version, as I happened to
> find in its diagram that some of its elements were different. I binned
> it at *Bay, and suddenly learned that it was risky for the seller to
> ship it to another address than the one provided by the buyer. From that
> point onwards, Chuck's help and Carlos Santisteban advice were of
> critical importance. I had asked Chuck to inspect the lens and return it
> if necessary, but seller was very reluctant to send it to Chuck's.
> Finally, we all came to an agreement and the Zuiko arrived to Chuck's
> home. After a very thorough inspection, one I couldn't have done better,
> Chuck wrote me about his positive evaluation and went into a field test,
> the 300 compared to the 85~250 @ 250mm at each F stop. He provided his
> own 85~250, and I suspect his sample was made at the Wyoming factory,
> because it has an extra f stop mine doesn't: between 5 and 8, his sample
> has 5,6 and thus could be directly compared to the prime at the same F
> value. ;-) [unexpected surprise below].
>
> End of story: the big package you already saw, passed through Customs
> without a question, without bureaucratic problems, without extra taxes.
> This really made me happy !! I have in mind that this very unusual event
> was possible because the 300 arrived on the date of birth of our
> National Hero: José Gervasio Artigas, June 19 1764.
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Gervasio_Artigas>
>
> I'm pasting here what Chuck told me about his methodology (partially
> edited, and omitted his conclusions, so you all can make each one's own):
>
> I've finished the tests which are pretty simple. Just a collection of
> stuff in the back yard with one shot each from both lenses at full
> aperture, 5.6, 8, 11 and 16. I moved the camera closer for the 250
> shots so that image size is very close between the two lenses. So there
> are 5 shots for each of 2 lenses = 10. The camera was pointed slightly
> downward.
>
> In a nutshell, at f/11 there's nothing to choose between the 300 and
> 85-250 except longer focal length. Image quality appears the same.
> There is a little sign in the lower right hand corner of each image
> telling the lens (300 or 250) and the aperture. All of the tests were
> shot at ISO 100 except that f/11 was done at ISO 200 and f/16 at ISO
> 400. I needed to keep the shutter speed reasonable and the 5D has
> almost no noise at 400. The wind was starting to blow a bit during the
> test so there may be a bit of motion blur in the flowers or in the hat.
> I used mirror lock and a remote release but I can't beat the wind
> completely.
>
> Incidentally, none of the images has been sharpened for effect. Only
> capture sharpening has been applied. If you want to try your hand at
> sharpening I'm sure you can improve them a bit further. I just don't
> sharpen until I know the final print or display size.
>
> Cheers. More to come.
> Chuck
>
> *****************
>
> I think they were somehow compressed when uploaded to Flickr. I will
> leave them there for a couple of weeks, then I shall delete them since
> I've reached the maximum amount admitted by Flickr beyond which I should
> buy their Pro account and I'm not willing to.
>
> Paired by F, 1024 wide
>
> 300/4,5:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3676298367/sizes/l/>
> ~250/5:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3676304677/sizes/l/>
>
> 300/5,6:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3676317365/sizes/l/>
> ~250/5,6: <failed to upload, should be 10 imgs here> seriously ! :-(
>
> 300/8:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3677142188/sizes/l/>
> ~250/8:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3677148612/sizes/l/>
>
> 300/11:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3677156614/sizes/l/>
> ~250/11:<http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3677160016/sizes/l/>
>
> 300/16:
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3676348867/sizes/l/>
> ~250/16:<http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3677163444/sizes/l/>
>
> Enjoy, opinions welcome !
>
> Fernando.
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|