dreammoose said,
> Methinks the sour Lama doth protest too much.
Heh heh. True enough. Hmmm. I think that line was invented by Willie the
Shake to be spoken by one of Lear's bad daughters. Right?
Then you asked:
> Was the Tokina any good? Tokina makes some good lenses, but was that one
> OK?
Well, I dunno! My cheezy ex-tripod had a low-spec plastic sleeve for the
center column. I suspect that if I hadn't sold the Tokina, it would have
been much happier atop the Bogen 3020 (old style) legs and 3047 head that I
have now!
I said,
> >If I used a Nikkormat as a hammer to beat my OM-4, I know it would
be...... uh.... a short fight.
You said,
> Appropriate choice of tools, Nikkormats are for hearvy duty hammering,
> while Olys are for taking pictures.
LOL!! Fair enough!
> Of course, I would never use my
> Nikon F2a or FG as a hammer either. Come to think of it, I never use
> them at all. I think I ran a roll through the FG 3-4 years ago?
Well, I admit that a good portion of this Nikon-envy of mine is "the grass
on the other side of the fence always looks greener." I actually rejected
the Nikkormat in 74 cause the needle swung up to show UNDEREXPOSURE and of
course, it felt like "a bucket of concrete with handles" in my hands. In
contrast, the OM-1's shutter dial nestled into the pocket between my left
thumb and forefinger like it was designed around a human hand. What a
concept. heh heh
===== OM-PC RANT =====
I'm probably just jones'ing because the OM4 is in the shop and I shot up 3
rolls in a big road trip with a completely mis-adjusted OM-PC. In low
light, using the center-weighted meter, I really couldn't make accurate
readings.
I made some tests rolls beforehand, of course. On manual metering, it
recommended overexposing +1 in daylight at f8 and -2 stops in available
dimness. On top of that, 1/1000 seems to be running way, way too fast. (In
failing sunset light, I exposed narrow-latitude Astia slide film at f8 at
1/60th and f/2 at 1/1000. The f8 shots were overexposed (DUH!) and f2
slides were dim. No one has changed the laws of physics while I've been
sleeping, have they? These are STILL equivalent exposures??
===== Simple 28mm test =====
BTW, both the Zuiko 28/2 and the Series1 28/1.9 showed tons of light falloff
when wide open. Admittedly I was shooting at sunset in changing light and
the shade of sky blue does change with the angle to the sun. But both
lenses appeared to show drop-off in *all 4* corners so I don't think it was
entirely a astronomical phenomenon.
Examining exposures made at f8, both lenses' results looked just the same
under a 50/1.8 as a loupe. No difference in sharpness anywhere. Obviously
Gary Reese's test conditions are far superior. I was just messing around to
see if I could trust the meter (I couldn't), and if there was a difference
between the Series1 and Zuiko in a simple tripod-mounted sunset setup,
(there wasn't) and to see if there were other surprises (there was: the
shutter speeds are not responding linearly and the tripod has...... a
learning curve.) [ ! ]
I love this hobby even when the news isn't all good.
My two cents,
Lama
< 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 >
|