----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> "Of course many Micro Four Thirds owners will be most interested in
> deciding between the 20mm F1.7 and the Olympus M.
> Zuiko Digital 17mm F2.8 Pancake. We were a little underwhelmed by the
> Olympus lens - it's competent without being
> outstanding - and in our opinion the 20mm is a much better choice. It's
> only a little larger and heavier, yet
> outperforms the 17mm in every aspect of our studio tests, while capturing
> almost three times as much light. However it
> is more expensive (although by how much depends greatly on where you
> live), and some users will still prefer the 17mm
> for its wider angle of view and E-P1-matching styling."
>
All I heard the 20/1.7 is a great lens, I was considering it as part of my
future 4/3 lens set (together with the 12/2) so that I can repeat the same
configuration like I use my 5D II wth OM 24/2 and 40/2. I don't think the
20/1.7 is so poor that the difference can be seen from web size image.
>
> As I have both an E-PL1 and E-M5, and have used both with low light levels
> on the same subjects, I can assure you that,
> whatever you read into Peter's web size images, noise, DR and pixel level
> detail are much better in the new body.
Yes, I expected E-M5 do much better than E-PL1 but Peter's web images
doesn't look good.
>
>> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/PC078597.jpg
>>
>> ISO 1250, 1/30s, IS on. Converted with Viewer 2, sharpness -2. Resized at
>> PS
>> with USM 60, 0.4.
>
> To the extent that I can tell from a small image, this looks like what I
> would expect from the E-PL1. There are some
> blocked up highlights, a subtle lack of crispness and noticeable noise. A
> perfectly nice image, but not as nice as with
> the E-M5.
>
It is my fault in the execution of the image, it is not easy to find an
E-PL1 shot without model release (from my family) and at high ISO. The shot
itself was over exposed a little, this handheld quick snap doesn't represent
the best of what the lens and E-PL1 can do but still not bad.
The scene doesn't look good at small size, here is a 2560x1920 without
sharpen. Viewer 2, exposure -0.4.
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/PC078597o.jpg
For the one who like sharp and no nosie:
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/PC078597p.jpg
C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
