> As to "visible on the camera LCD" I question that.
I would say that I would doubt it too, but I might not be so quick to
smack that claim down. There are times when a lens immediately asserts
itself in the viewfinder, either OVF or EVF. The OMZ 35/2 and 100/2
are two such lenses that reach through the viewfinder, grab your
eyeball and proceed to slam you around like you're living in a Loonie
Toons cartoon. Also, there are times when I import the images into the
computer and can identify lens and/or camera on the thumbnail images.
The E-1 and L1 are two such cameras that are quite blatant about
tonalities, and the PanaLeica 14-50 is a lens that has microcontrast
characteristics that also influence the thumbnail images, regardless
of camera used.
> The other lenses used with the same in cam processing don't measure up in the
> microcontrast category.
Defining "microcontrast" seems to be pretty hard to do. It's almost
more of a concept than a measurable trait. And I think that's why it's
so subjective as to whether or not a lens has it.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|