No no no, I think you mis-understood me. On my OM-1, with darkroom
prints,
if I can get a great 9x11in, I am happy. I rarely print bigger, 35mm
film starts to
break down at much larger sizes, for that I use MF.
So, following on our discussions a month or so ago, where people
claimed the 35/2.0 to be
a so-so lens, I stated that, if it can give me a great 9x11, I am
happy. The high-res digital
samples I've seen convince me that this is the case (even wide open)
and your example shows that,
stopped down, the lens has very good resolution, except perhaps the
extreme corners.
I am sure that your image will print nicely to 1 meter+, in fact. But
I would never personally
(with the equipment at hand) attempt that with 35mm film except under
extremely controlled
circumstances, as every link in the analog imaging chain would have to
be perfect
(film, enlerger lens, etc).
I shoot FP4+ mostly (I just bought a bulk roll which should see me
through the year) and grain will
become a problem a huge sizes, not to mention the fact that I hate
using a tripod for 35mm, the whole
*point* is the mobility and the agility, otherwise may as well bring a
bigger/better camera also.
On 05 Aug 2009, at 10:59 AM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>>
> It is so sad to see the 5D II with OM 35/2 is only good for making
> 9x11
> print :-)
>
> 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/
|