> From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>>
> On 4/28/2019 12:53 PM, tOM Trottier wrote:
>> On 23 Apr 2019 at 21:57 re:"Re: [OM] Image Processing - AAARGH!..."
>> Wayne Harridge(Wayne Harridge <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>) wrote:
>>
>>> The old OM Zuikos didn't need any correction !
>> How about the radioactive 55/1.2 ?
>
> WAs did indeed benefit from PTLens. If I recall correctly, one of my first
> roll-overs was of a small bridge
> shot with the 21/3.5. Moderate, but obvious, distortion, nicely corrected by
> PTLens.
Not to speak for Wayne, but I think the argument was that, in the old days,
lenses had no assumption of processing available, so they were *optically*
better, whereas today, it is routine for lenses to *depend upon* software
correction of certain aberrations.
Certainly, almost every lens I use can benefit from a LITTLE bit of contrast
tweaking. But with the OM Zuikos, that is often all I do. Some of them (like
the 55/1.2, shot wide open) really demand contrast improvement.
Certainly, there was a bit of levity and curmudgeon-ness going on there, too,
right, Wayne? :-)
Jan
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|