I posted a corrective note on their review page
Chuck Norcutt
Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I agree. Multicoating shouldn't have anything to do with chromatic
> aberration. But I wouldn't expect this guy to know whether an old OM
> 50mm lens was really multicoated or not. Even we don't seem to be able
> to say for sure. As you may recall some early OM lenses are multicoated
> but not every element is multicoated and only some lenses advertise that
> they're multicoated. But as to the lens test itself he probably doesn't
> have to know very much about optics to be able to setup the test and run
> the software. He should just refrain from speaking beyond his
> knowledge. :-)
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> Dawid Loubser wrote:
>> This following sentence (from the review) makes me seriously doubt
>> that these guys know what they are doing. First of all, even though it
>> is clearly
>> a single coated lens (the F.Zuiko moniker tells us that) they state:
>>
>>> "Despite the fact that the lens is quite long in the tooth, its
>>> multi-coating does
>>> a good job of reducing chromatic aberration"
>> Firstly, the lens in question does not have multi-coating (only the MS
>> and MIJ versions
>> have that, this is clearly a second generation single-coated example),
>> and secondly,
>> I was always under the impression that the optical formula of
>> the lens is 100% responsible for correcting (or not) chromatic
>> aberration and colour
>> fringing. Coating merely improves light transmission, and decreases
>> flare/haze caused
>> by internal reflections. Not so?
>>
>> <rant>
>>
>> I always wonder about these tests - somebody happens to get their
>> hands on an ancient
>> OM optic, slap it on a digital body, and produce a "test". If people
>> are so drawn to this,
>> why not at least test the more interesting lenses? Use a 50/2.0 or
>> 90/2.0 Macro, use
>> a 21/2.0, or any of these amazing older lenses. Somehow, it's always
>> the humble 50/1.8 "body cap"
>> they got somewhere for free or for $10.
>>
>> </rant>
>>
>> Hope you all have a great week! I am picking up an Epson V700 scanner
>> today - it's no Nikon 9000
>> I know, but it should do just fine with my 6x7c, and 6x17cm slides,
>> and as a huge side benefit, I
>> can start scanning in some of my darkroom prints so you guys can see
>> how much I suck with
>> my OM-1! :-) Hopefully I can start to meaningfully contribute to TOPE
>> etc now, as well as
>> have images to post together with my often wild claims around OM optics.
>>
>> ...that is, if the Metro Police officers manning the roadblock which I
>> sort-of forcefully skipped
>> today to make the airport in time don't find me and lock me up first.
>> It's pretty scary expecting
>> them to come knocking on your door any moment, but in life, for every
>> action there is a set of tradeoffs
>> one makes, and I am afraid with this one they had the lowest priority.
>> Of course, I don't expect many
>> of you have experience with the police force of an African country. An
>> equal amount of incompetence and
>> ruthlessness / unreasonableness prevails. The South African traffic
>> system (fines, registrations, etc)
>> was really only computerised about 1 or 2 years ago, with huge
>> teething troubles, so I am hoping that
>> they will "forget" about me...
>>
>> *sigh*
>>
>> On 06 Jul 2009, at 8:11 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1279/cat/14
>>>
>>> This isn't the miJ is it?
>>> Mike
>>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|