That is my thinking too, Ed.
Thanks as ever for your treasure-trove of scanned tests, I've spent
many happy hours in them over the years :-)
On 28 Apr 2012, at 2:28 PM, Sawyer, Edward wrote:
>
> What I think about it is his testing regimen was far too subjective
> to draw any meaningful conclusions like that from the data. For
> more objective data, check the workof Modern Photography back in the
> day. I have many of those tests scanned at posted at
> www.edsawyer.com/lenstests
>
> Ed
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2012, at 6:16 AM, "olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> <olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
>
>> [OM] Gary Reese's test of the Zuiko 50/1.2 (really?)
>> To: Olympus Camera Discussion <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Message-ID: <EE5C60DE-9AAF-4B91-81F8-75F5E09406A7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format=flowed;
>> delsp=yes
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> So, at f/2.8 (a pretty nice aperture to shoot at for subtly shallow
>> DOF), gary reese tested the Zuiko 50/1.2 to be superiour not only to
>> the Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro, but also superior to the Leica M-mount
>> 50mm Summicron, and the Leica M-Mount 90mm f/2.0 Apo ASPH. I find
>> that
>> incredible - what do you guys think about that?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|