I like slides, projected about 5-6ft wide on a matte screen or white wall.
Then you look for the fine detail like tree limbs, letters on license
plates, words on street signs, etc... that's about what, 50x for a 6ft wide
projected image? Second choice is the 4000dpi scan from my Polaroid
Sprintscan. I scanned one negative, was looking at the license plate letters
at 400x in Photoshop Elements, and realized that I could actually read the
license plate... When I look on the negative I could barely *see* where it
was...
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
on 1/27/03 12:56 AM, C.H.Ling at chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Depends on what are you checking:
>
> - for resolution, a good one hour lab do better than 2700dpi film
> scanner, with a 10x loupe on 4x6 print, not bad for resolution
> judgment.
> - for color, never use negative.
> - for vignetting and distortion, a small print with un-aid eyes is
> good enough.
> - for tone rendering, again job of slide.
>
> In any case you need a tripod, test with wide open and stop down, for
> wide open you need to take a few shoots with re-focus, focusing error
> is very easy happen at wide open.
>
> There is certainly different in performance for the two lenses, go
> back to a 1991(?) pop photo you will found their test reports.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
>
> "Richard F. Man" wrote:
>>
>> At 04:19 PM 1/27/2003 +0800, Albert wrote:
>>> 4x6 and Loupe..
>>>
>>> Can't tell the difference... That's not words out of MY mouth, that's
>>> words out of the Leica owner's mouth..
>>> ..
>>
>> 4x6 is a lousy way to judge lens quality :-) I was reading a report on the
>> wonder-Tamron 28-300 (or is it 24-300) lens. The reviewer praises it so
>> much, and then says something like the prints are quite good at 4x6.
>>
>> Arrgggghhhhhhhhhhhh... 8x12 minimum! Otherwise, may as well get a P&S :-)
< 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 >
|