Thanks, I've passed that image link along to the interested party.
Chuck Norcutt
deebel wrote:
> Entire frame was resized. No cropping
>
> Dave
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 30 June 2010 00:51
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OM] E-thingy body recommendation
>
> Can I assume that this is the entire frame resized from 2560x1920 down
> to 800x600? If so it looks pretty good and covers about 29mm horizontally.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> deebel wrote:
>> Sorry this is hastily done using a flexible day-timer rule and not at a
> true
>> perpendicular, however it is super macro in program mode auto focus
>>
>> HQ 2560 x 1920
>>
>> http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj37/deebel/Cameras/P1010127.jpg
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Moose [mailto:olymoose@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: 29 June 2010 22:40
>> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
>> Subject: Re: [OM] E-thingy body recommendation
>>
>> On 6/29/2010 1:19 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>> Thanks for the feedback. The G7 is definitely a contender. But Wrotniak
>> says the C-5050 is actually capable of getting down to 2.5 cm wide in its
>> "super macro" mode.
>>
>> The calculations in my post were based on the dpreview test. The
>> Super-Macro test shots there disagree with Wrotniak. The caption says
>> 3.2 x 2.4 cm and the image of a ruler covers 3.1 cm.
>> <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc5050z/page16.asp>
>> The Imaging Resource test says 'In "Super Macro" mode, it did quite a
>> bit better, with a minimum capture area of only 1.29 x 0.97 inches (33 x
>> 25 mm).' The Super-Macro test image agrees.
>> <http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/C5050/FULLRES/C55MACS.HTM>
>>
>> The other review sources I use either don't have a review or don't
>> mention field coverage.
>>
>> If Wrotniak is correct, the resolution numbers I calculated would
>> certainly change. Unfortunately, his sample shots don't include a ruler.
>> ;-)
>>
>> Perhaps Dave has a ruler he could photograph.
>>
>>> But the G7 was built a couple of years later and is 10 MP instead of 5 so
>> definitely wins the pixel war. It also has a larger screen. Both the A1
>> and the C-5050, however, have tilting screens.
>>>
>> Usually, that's big deal for me. In a specialized use like this, I
>> assume some sort fixed of copy setup would be used. Depending on the
>> configuration, it might or might not make any difference. I wouldn't be
>> using this anyway. I'd just pop the 5D on the copy stand with 90/2.8
>> Macro or Oly 80/4 Auto on bellows.
>>
>> The 2.5", 207,000 pixel screen of the G7, vs. 1.8", 114,000 would
>> certainly be an advantage for focusing
>>
>> Come to think of it, the G7 works with Canon's rather nice Remote
>> Capture software [Sadly dropped on the G11 :-( ]. That would be just
>> great for this use. Set up copy stuff next to computer and operate it
>> from the big screen. And again, the higher viewfinder resolution would
> help.
>> The C-5050 may have a tethered mode? I will leave the mysteries of Oly
>> software to others.
>>
>>> I already think the A1 is out for this application. Its 28-200
> equivalent
>> lens makes for a better general purpose camera than the C-5050 but without
>> some additional optical aid the A1 can't do better
>>> than about 4.8 cm as best horizontal coverage. It takes a +4 and a +2
>> closeup lens to get it down to 2.8 cm. There are other ways to skin the
> cat
>> but why if the G7 and C-5050 do the job without any extra help.
>>>
>> Yeah, there are only a few digicams with all the desired characteristics.
>>
>> Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
