On 9/11/2011 9:10 AM, Jim Nichols wrote:
> Brian,
>
> Playing the devil's advocate, is it possible the f/22 lens setting forced
> the E-3 shutter to slow down enough that un-noticed camera motion caused the
> softness?
You may advocate for the Devil all you want - it's gonna be soft at f22.
I tested the 135/4.5 on film, on a sturdy tripod. The sort of calculations
Chuck so generously provides are useful, but
sometimes I just want to see in person.
F16 was pretty good, at f22, I could see softening at the place of focus, but
the trade-off for more sharpness through
DOF in my highly 3D subject wasn't bad. F32 was just soft, no way around it. I
haven't used f32 since.
The rough 4/3s equivalents for the above would be f16=>f8, f22 = f11 and f32 =
f16. So at f22, Brian had gone beyond the
f32 on FF film that I found unacceptably soft, to the eq. of f44 on film.
But, soft! how light through yonder lens breaks.
... we see through a glass, softly.
Through such small aperture
My sensor loses its resolution
And wanders purposeless
Through fields of dreamlike
Light and shadow
F64 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/
|