Chuck wrote
>
> I don't see much difference at all except that the 100mm shot has some
> direct sun and therefore more contrast.
>
> ps: This may be the first test shot from your apartment where the air is
> clear enough that I can see a mountain in the background at upper right.
> I never knew it was there. :-)
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 2/4/2012 10:40 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
> > I'm a bit relaxed as you say there were focus error, if one can see the
> > difference with E-1's LCD then the lens is very bad, as the embeded JPEG
> > is only 1280x960 pixel.
> >
> > Some time ago I did a comparison test on 90/2 and 100/2 with 5D II for
> > distance object. 100/2 is slightly better at the center but 90/2 is very
> > even across the field and better than 100/2 at the edges. I don't think
> > 90/2 will do poorer for close objects.
> >
> > 90/2 at F4 no sharpen
> >
> > http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_9566.JPG
In C. H. Ling's 13 April 2011 shot with the 24/2, the mountain is visible ...
but
in the overall scheme of things it's much smaller ...
Brian Swale.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
