testing at f11+ can mean long exposure times. The ilford range of films
all suffer from reciprocity failure with shutter speeds around 1
second. Kodak Tmax 100 is as bad or worse. When I did some testing for
myself I favoured Fuji acros100 B&W. It is ok for around 120s before it
requires slight compensation. However I think the results from B&W will
need printing or scanning for you to make comparisons. I did quite a few
tests with velvia 100 which allows you to make comparisons with a light
table and loupe...
regards
james
Carlos J. Santisteban wrote:
> Hi all,
> Yes, film... ;-)
>
> I'm planning to make a comprehensive testing of, ahem, ALL of my lenses...
> in order to have some evidence to rationalize the collection, keeping the
> best ones and selling the spares.
>
> I could test several of them on the digital with adapters, but I'd prefer
> film for this "definitive" test because of:
>
> 1) Some lens mounts aren't adaptable to my EOS body... and I have no E-P1
> ;-)
> 2) My EOS is not full-frame, and I want to be certain about quality even at
> the very corners.
> 3) I don't want to be biased by sensor issues...
>
> Due to cost I'd like to make it in B&W -- CA would cause blurring, anyway. I
> can process B&W by myself.
>
> Which is, according to your experience, the best film to get the most from a
> lens -- besides the defunct Technical Pan? Since there's a LOT of film to be
> used, availability in long rolls (I've got a bulk loader) is welcome.
>
> Ease of scanning would be appreciated, too, but since my scanner is so-so,
> I'll probably "shoot" the developed film with a high-enlargement macro
> setup... fuel for another question -- reversed Zuiko 24/2.8?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance,
>
Companies Act 2006 : http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/companyinfo
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|