I've posted four new lens tests at:
http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default.htm
These include:
1. 200mm f/4 MC Zuiko
a. with Joel Wilcox's overhauled OM-1, mirror lock up and the Bogen
Telephoto Lens Support
b. with Joel's Wilcox's overhauled OM-1 and just mirror lock up.
2. 135mm f/4.5 MC Zuiko Macro w/ OM-4, mirror and auto diaphram prefire and
Bogen T.L.S.
3. 65-200mm f/4 MC Zuiko w/ OM-4, mirror and auto diaphram prefire and Bogen
T.L.S.
Note that it probably takes the utmost in lens and camera stabilizing to get
good results out of the 200mm f/4. The hunch that a shutter overhaul in an
OM-1 can result in less vibration probably doesn't hold true. A vertical
shake in the left part of the slide at f/5.6 (1/60th sec.) and f/8 (1/30th
sec.), on Joel's overhauled OM-1 (original model), is likely due to residual
vibration from the auto diaphram mechanism.
A Bogen Telephoto Lens Support, plus an OM-4 with mirror and auto diaphram
prefire, appears to be able to coax out a performance increase in a 135mm
f/4.5 Zuiko Macro, although a lens overhaul or light fungus removal might
also have contributed. Same is true of a 65-200mm f/4 Zuiko at 200mm,
although it didn't have fungus before an overhaul.
>From a statistical perspective, there are too many variables confounding this
data to be able to make definitive statements. Not the least of which are my
eyes. I can't make 3 or 4 way comparisons of tests shots (like the 200mm f/4
tests). So, I offer these tests strictly as food for thought. From a
practical point of view, employ all the vibration reductions techniques at
your disposal, given the nature of the shot and the amount of time available
to shoot it. Then pray (or forget the problems). :-)
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|