On 11/27/2014 12:15 PM, Walters, Martin wrote:
Chuck:
Will be interested to hear what you think of the mZ 75-300. As I remember,
Moose has one of these and likes it. The reviews suggest that it's generally
pretty good up to a 200-something focal length.
I like it right up to 300 mm.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Oly75-300/CaliforniaJay.htm>
I think there are a couple of reasons folks are often wrong about the long end.
1. DOF gets shallow faster than you might imagine. Very few of us have much, if any, past experience with 600 mm AOV
lenses, especially hand holdable ones, and it's easy to miss that factor. I took some shots of dew drops on spider webs
with it @ 300 mm on my E-M5, and didn't like what I saw in a brief check on the LCD. I switched the lens and tripod to
the GX7, and thought, on that casual basis, that the Panny did better.
When I actually looked closely @ 100%, back home on the big screen, I discovered that each had a really sharp, quite
shallow, plane of focus, but it was indifferent places/depths on the two camera/lens combos! How much of that was
operator and how much difference in the AF systems, I don't know. The reason I missed this in the field was that I only
looked at the very central portion enlarged on the LCD. (But Carol, Bob and Joan were moving on through the Botanic
Garden, and already out of sight, so I needed to get moving. :-) )
I do know that I use the MF ring, enlarged LCD view and focus bracket more now than before when out there in super-tele
land. And it does make a difference. It's easy to forget how 'exotic' a 600 mm AOV really is, and that it requires more
care and attention than more 'normal' focal lengths to get the best results.
This should give an idea of the shallow DOF. I should mention that this isn't a small fern; the head is inches across,
shot from say 12-15 feet, where I couldn't use my feet to get closer.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Oly75-300/FiddleHead2.htm>
2. Images from this lens, esp. including the long end, respond quite well to deconvolution in post to bring
out/clarify/sharpen details. With capture 'sharpening' (Correction? Clarifying?) with FocusMagic as a regular part of my
work flow, I get lots and lots of really sharp images at 300 mm. It's in this factor where bench tests may not be
accurate predictors of practical results.*
Long View Moose
* Mostly aren't, I think. "Look at that MTF curve fall off! Oh Dear!" "So why do I
have these lovely, sharp images?"
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|