There are two versions of the 24/2.8. The oldest type "had" a problem with
separating elements in the rear of the lens. These parts are long gone, and
new version elements do not fit. This may be why you're having a sharpness
problem.
John Hermanson
___________________________________
Camtech, Olympus Service since 1977.
21 South Ln. Huntington NY 11743-4714
631-424-2121 http://www.zuiko.com
Free Olympus Manuals: 1-800-221-3000
___________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: <atk@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 7:55 AM
Subject: [OM] 24 mm lens again
>
> Hum -- yesterday I sent a message about a 24mm lens I 'tested'. I guess I
> asked the question in the wrong way -- what I had asked was
> "should I keep this lens" - I should have asked "Why aren't my pictures
sharp."
>
> Is it my technique, the lens, the film, developer or expectation. For
example
> I took a picture of the washington monument (actually several) but one was
> from several thousand feet away (so it occupies about 1/10th to 1/15th
> the vertical frame). In this picture the focus was infinity -- it was at
f/8 at
> 1/500 of a second. As a 'snap' shot (4x6 print) I would have expected it
to be
> crystal sharp -- it wasn't. Now I can't figure out why. Note this wasn't a
zoom
> and crop -- it was just a 4x6 that the 1hour lab produced that I was
looking
> at.
>
> In another shot -- I took a picture of an ambulance. It covers about 1/2
to 1/3
> of the frame. I can't read the logo on the driver side. Shouldn't I be
able to?
>
> Pictures of things near (approx 1 to 20 feet) look sharp (i.e., I find the
> 4x6 print pleasing -- not sure they would look as nice as an 8x10).
>
> Are my expecation too high for colour film ? Is the lens soft ? Is kodak
gold
> 200 and 100 just not capable of producing the sort of image i'm looking
for ?
> Do 1 hour photo just do a lousy job of developing the film (grain was rath
er
> ughly -- I know in b&w many photo shops produced yucky grain vs home
> developing)
>
> The picture was printed using that new digital to photo paper process ritz
> uses. Could that be the reason the images are soft? I looked at the
negatives
> but it was hard to tell with the loop they had. I have a nicer loop but it
> is at my parents house many days away.
>
> By golly someone here must know the answer!! I sure don't.
>
>
>
>
> < 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|