Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Nope, It missed it by few hundred miles

Subject: Re: [OM] Nope, It missed it by few hundred miles
From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" <cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 11:32:42 +0200
Hi Julian, Wayne, and all.

>>The analogue cameras need an anti aliasing filter (always formed by the
>>lens) to avoid base - fog increase. This has been one of the limits to 35mm
>>lens performance for decades, with cost being another.
>

[snip]

>Hence, I don't think
>the sharpness of a lens is going to increase or decrease fog, ie.
>noise, from film grain sampling. Light scattering in the lens is much
>more likely to increase fog. I can't figure how an analog camera would
>need anti-aliasing from of an overly sharp lens.

I agree -- no lens can be too sharp for film. In fact, *very* sharp lenses
are *good* for film.

A while ago, I was testing a Z*iss Sonnar 135/2.8 against my Tamron SP
70-210/3.5, on a single body (C*ntax Aria) with a single roll of film
(Kodak E100S, IIRC). The *first* thing I noticed on the slides was that the
Sonnar shots had much *finer* grain than the Tamron's. Coming from the very
same roll of film (and same subject on same lighting conditions and same
exposure), it *had* to be the lens -- no emulsion batch or processing
differences here.

*Later* I read from a L*ica user that highly corrected lenses (like L*ica
and Z*iss) get finer grain on the same film, due to less light scattering
or so. With my previous experience, I have no doubt about it.

Enjoy,

...

Carlos J. Santisteban

<cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<http://cjss.galeon.com>



< 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