Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Photodo lens sharpness ratings

Subject: Re: [OM] Photodo lens sharpness ratings
From: "John Hermanson" <omtech@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:21:44 -0400
A customer came by with his old OM-G (he loves it).  He also brought by the
photos he shot of one of George Barris's cars (he created, the Batmobile,
the Munsters cars, The Green Hornet, etc).  These were done in 120  and the
detail, sharpness and dof were phenomenal.

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: Ken Norton <image66@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Photodo lens sharpness ratings


| >>Large formats suck (sharpness-wise, not grain-wise) if you keep the
| >>aperture miniscule. Wider is sharper.
|
| What a bunch of garbage some wonderbrick numbed minds come up with.  Over
| and over again we read from Nikon/Canon people reasons why their film
| format of choice is superior to large-format.  This DOF arguement is as
| crusty as an old diaper.  And it stinks just as bad.
|
| When comparing images from a 4x5 that are compositioned the same as 35mm
| (pick either vertical or horizontal to match images) you will need a 125mm
| lens in 4x5 to match a 50mm lens in 35mm film format.  Granted, the DOF
| will be different at a given aperature and without using movements will
| require stopping down two additional stops on the 4x5 to match DOF.
|
| Will the additional two stops affect diffraction enough to be a problem in
| the 4x5?  Possible if you are running say F45 or F64.  However, even at
| that, one must compare final usage size to determine how much of a problem
| it is.  The reality is that blowing up to a 11x14 print size will still be
| in the large format favor because any loss of resolution due to defraction
| is more than made up for in the resolving capability of the film and the
| less magnification of lens aberations.
|
| One cannot shoot a large format the same way as a 35mm camera.  First of
| all, why would you?  The days of the 4x5 press camera are long gone and
the
| main purpose today is fine-art or any commercial work requiring movements.
| A good 4x5 field camera can produce absolutely stunning images and even
| with print sizes of 11x14 or 16x20 defraction really isn't a problem.  I
| have a 6x7 that has some movements on the back (film back swings/tilts)
and
| it comes in handy when working in the studio but in the field I'll just
| stop down more.  That way I don't have to worry about destroying a frame
| (mine doesn't have a dark slide).
|
| I'll never forget a job my last employer's ad-agency did.  They had a
| commercial photographer photograph our products with a 4x5.  They were
| incredibly anal about exposure and must have blown close to a dozen
| poloroids on each and every shot.  He never used movements, the exposures
| never were perfect and flash reflections hot spotted areas.  They knew
that
| it was going to be a photoshop job (and charged us accordingly).  All this
| detail, detail, detail and using such high-end film format for the job.
| For what?  A product catalog in duotone where the image size never
exceeded
| 4x5 on the printed page.  How did they get the image into the computer?
| Flatbed scanner at 300dpi.  Didn't matter, the print shop never did get
the
| plates lined up so every single catalog had blurry pictures.  (not one
page
| of any of the 10,000 catalogs were correct).  For this we paid close to
| $5000 for the photography alone!  It was pure garbage and I let it be
known
| where every fault was at.  Didn't matter, rumor was that our marketing
| director was having an affair with both our boss and probably everybody at
| the ad agency. I was eventually "downsized" and the marketing director
(she
| was just a secretary with no marketing background or knowledge) is still
| there and the ad agency is still ripping the company off.
|
| To quote somebody we've all come to love:  "Think, people, THINK!
|
| Ken Norton
|
| < 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz