I was just joking, OM 35/2's performance is indeed very good. For the
extreme corners, there is no hope, all Zuiko F2 wide has the same problem, I
believe the designer expected the corners to be covered by slide mount.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dawid Loubser"
> 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/
|