You really should keep track of the apertures used. There is a distinct
difference between the images but it not in the distance... it's in the
foreground. The leaves and grass in the foreground at left are much
sharper in the Takumar shot than with the Summicron. The Takumar was
focused closer and/or shot at a smaller aperture than the Summicron.
Chuck Norcutt
On 8/22/2011 12:47 PM, Jim Nichols wrote:
> Chuck and Chris,
>
> I processed a RAW image made with a 55mm Takumar on my Fotodiox adapter (7mm
> flange to flange), mounted on the E-1. I did not record an exact f-stop.
> The lens was set at the infinity stop.
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Takumar+55+at+Infinity+Mark.jpg.html
>
> The white traffic signs seen on the left side of the street were
> approximately 250 feet away.
>
> I shot a similar RAW image with a 50mm Leica-R Summicron on a Leica-R-to-4/3
> adapter, mounted on the E-1. This lens has focus travel past infinity, so it
> was focused on the most distant object. On the focus scale, this was about
> the width of the infinity symbol ahead of the infinity stop. Processing was
> identical to the previous image.
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Summicron+Focused+at+Infinity.jpg.html
>
> To my eyes, viewed at 100% before any resizing, I can't tell much difference
> except for the difference in lighting. Cars at 250 to 300 feet have similar
> sharpness.
>
> I conclude that, for practical purposes, the 7mm adapter will serve its
> purpose.
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
