The test is mainly for resolution, I found 90/2 is no poorer than any other
lenses I have used at 1:4, it has outstanding even performance from edge
to edge for close and distance objects. If you look carefully at the long
edges you will see the OM 50/3.5 is softer than the other two.
For distance objects the 90/2 has better edge resolution when compared with
my 100/2, the image quality is excellent even wide open.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Wilcox" <jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012, at 06:20 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>> I just made a test with more control on the lighting and focusing. A
>> spirit
>> level is used to ensure things are well aligned. It is really difficult
>> to
>> choose a flat object, finally a printed matter is used.
>>
>> Testes were made with flash bounced off the wall. Flash is used to ensure
>> vibration effect is minimal. Focus is done with liveview at max aperture.
>> The magnification is around 1:4. The result said for itself.
>>
>> 5D II, F11, RAW converted with DPP, sharpness=0. 8MB each
>>
>> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_6381_50F35-11.JPG
>>
>> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_6380_90F2-11.JPG
>>
>> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_6382_135-11.JPG
>
> I don't see a lot to choose from in terms of sharpness. I looked at
> 100% and screen sizes and get the same impression. The main differences
> seem to be in contrast. The 50 and 90 seem to have a similar amount of
> contrast, though the impact of it is different, with the 90 seemingly a
> bit more pleasing to my taste. The 135 seems a little softer in
> contrast, perfectly fine but a little less exciting. I'm not at my best
> monitor, so I'll reserve a little judgment and give it another look
> later.
>
> Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
