> I'll have to try some tests with the 50s I own on the antiquated and
> irrelevant 5D.
Sorry. Don't take it personally. :)
> You're a better man than I testing why you would carry
> one over the other. I just have "impressions" based on a few photos I
> have taken with each:
Trust me, I'm not going to get into all the nuances and hyper
pickiness that some folks, like the Leica folks, get into. What I am
trying to do, however, is quantify some of the "impressions" I also
have. A case in point would be the 100/2.8. In the absence of the
100/2 it is one of the finest lenses known to man.
As to the publishing of the tests on www.zone-10.com, I've almost
always shared my tests and impressions in the past. I'm not going to
stop now. I want to be as helpful to the community as possible.
> 5) 50/1.2 -- simply makes me want to shoot at 50mm more; same class
> of lens as the 100/2 (that's my hypothesis at least); makes 12 MP
> almost relevant
It is a pretty fantastic lens. I notice that edge thing going on with
it too, just like I see with the 35/2, 35-80 and 100/2. That's a big
glob of glass.
> Now that is something I don't want to hear! My focus chip on the OM-EOS
> adapter works to f8, but I use f11 and f16 a lot.
I'm noticing it over and over again. What I thought was a fluke is
becoming a trend. I'm really not sure what is causing it but it is
happening consistantly enough that I'm sufficiently intrigued. In a
one-off situation, I can blame Chuck's "focus error". But every time
that I've done this? It's happening no matter the camera and no matter
the focusing method. Live-view is a great way to get focus nailed down
and I've done it both wide-open and stopped-down.
It manifests itself this way: The 100/2 increases DoF beyond the plane
of focus in a greater manner than the 100/2.8. It's harder to tell
what is happening on the near side of the plane of focus because
diffraction blurring starts to kick in and is masking most of the
differences. I don't know if it is a focus-shift or if there is an
assymetrical DoF characteristic in one of the lenses.
I would agree with your assessment about the 50/1.8. I think that for
landscape work, where we are stopped down, it is a very nice lens and
probably a bit better than the 50/1.4. But wider than F5.6 the 50/1.4
seems to be better. At F2.8, the 50/1.4 is producing a more pleasing
image. A 50mm, to me, is mostly a long-wide lens. As such, for
people/event photography, it is used mostly in the 2-4 meter range.
Based on what I'm seeing, the 50/1.4 is a bit better.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|