You sure? I see about 1/2 stop exposure difference in favor of the
Zeiss (which may or may not be an error) and a small difference in color
but that's about it. I don't see any bragging rights anywhere.
Chuck Norcutt
On 11/19/2011 8:44 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> To my eye, admittedly not lingering too long in order to garner true first
> opinion, the Zeiss, hands down.
>
> --Bob
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 1:00 AM, Moose wrote:
>
>> While at Mike& Marnie's last month, there was a new Marnie floral
>> composition to photograph. I took the opportunity to
>> compare three different 50 mm focal length lenses.
>>
>> I've been curious for some time how the 50s Zeiss f2.8 TessarT might compare
>> to later lenses. I can't do that on the 5D,
>> as the Tessar interferes with the mirror, but now can do so on the 60D.
>>
>> Unfortunately, my Canon 50/1.8 AF lens is still in Montana, so only three
>> lenses compared:
>> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Lenses/50mm_lenses/50mmcomp.htm>
>>
>> Olympus Zuiko 50/1.8, final, miJ version
>> Carl Zeiss Jena 50/2.8 Tessar T
>> Tamron 28-300/3.5-6.3 A06
>>
>> They aren't quite the same focal lengths, the Zeiss longer than the Zuiko
>> and the Tamron at what it thinks is 50mm quiet
>> a bit shorter. I've scaled the Tammy up and the Zeiss down to match the
>> Zuiko, but the perspectives are still slightly
>> different.
>>
>> Not that much difference in bokeh, but lots of color, contrast, etc.
>> differences.
>>
>> 50 MM 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/
|