Mike,
Thanks for the link to the article, it looks very interesting!
--
Chris Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana
260-486-2581
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798
Become a fan on Facebook
On 7/8/11 5:13 PM, "usher99@xxxxxxx" <usher99@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/3knmf8m
>
> Explains a few things as to why some Zeiss lenses don't always test
> well. I am not a Zeissoholic by any means but some Zeiss appears
> penalized for choosing to better correct other aberrations rather than
> field curvature. There are always compromises of course and one wants
> a lens that excels at its intended use rather than scoring well on a
> flat target. (OK, they may have their own ax to grind) A fixed flat
> target at a modest distance can only tell so much. Targets at various
> distances and rendering of 3D targets should be assessed. The current
> testing schemes seem very arbitrary, idiosyncratic and inconsistent and
> certainly difficult to compare across testing sites.
> I pinged Dr. Nasse about a crummy score on Photozone, and he actually
> took the time for a detailed explanation.
>
> 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/
|