One more thing, why don't Olympus provide those data?
Thx,
Ocean
>From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Re: Aperture setting rules of thumb
>Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:20:16 -0800 (PST)
>
> > What are yours rules of thumb for F value setting in
> > different situations?
>
>Several months ago I did lens resolution tests. It contained
>tests of various older Zuikos as well as the 14-54. Here is a
>repeat of that post:
>
>
>Using the USAF line-pair test chart, I photographed it using my
>collection of lenses using the same chart-size (filling the
>viewfinder). I had the chart taped to the side of my house in
>direct sunlight and used every common F-stop from F4-F22 (if the
>lens supported it). In a couple of instances, I did also do a
>wide-open test.
>
>I was a touch lazy in the summer heat and just used a monopod,
>but the shutter speeds never dropped below 1/250, so I was
>pretty safe. Aperture priority exposure mode. If I feel like
>doing this again, I'll use a tripod. Also, I used JPEG HQ mode
>with +2 sharpening. No halos visible. In comparative testing,
>I've found an increase of about one line pair when shooting RAW.
>So these measurements are relative to a best possible in JPEG HQ
>mode.
>
>First things first. The DZ 14-54 lens is as good if not better
>than any of my prime lenses when it comes to sharpness and
>contrast. Therefore, there really is no gain to shoot with the
>prime lenses in any focal length the DZ covers. However,
>distortion, and symmetry is a touch better with the old Zuikos.
>There are other issues at play too, but for pure resolution, the
>DZ 14-54 is outstandng. I'll get into specifics on the website
>where I'll post samples of each focal length and aperture, but
>I'm summarizing here with my comments.
>
>A measurement of -1 LP means that it resolved one less line-pair
>from the best image possible (in this test). As no lens or
>setting exceeded my best possible, I believe I hit the AA filter
>and process engine limits. -2 LP would be two line-pairs less.
>For a point of comparison, the limit is the sixth "6" LP in my
>test chart.
>
>24/2.8 (multicoated blacknose) sn 2240XX
>F4, -2 LP
>F5.6, -1 LP
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, 0 LP
>F16, -1 LP, reduced contrast
>
>35/2.8 (singlecoated, silvernose) sn 1599XX
>F4, -1 LP
>F5.6, 0 LP
>F8, 0 LP (nicest)
>F11, 0 LP,
>F16, -1 LP, reduced contrast
>
>50/1.8 (silglecoated, silvernose) sn 2730XX
>F1.8, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>F2.8, -2 LP
>F4, 0 LP
>F5.8, -1 LP (very close to F4, F8)
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, -1 LP (very close to F8, reduced contrast)
>F16, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>
>50/3.5 (singlecoated, silvernose) sn 1254XX
>F3.5, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>F5.6, 0 LP
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, 0 LP
>F16, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>F22, -2 LP (reduced contrast)
>
>100/2.8 (singlecoated, silvernose) sn 1306XX
>F2.8, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>F4, -1 LP
>F5.6, 0 LP
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, 0 LP
>F16, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>F22, -1 LP (reduced contrast)
>
>200/4 (singlecoated, silvernose) sn 1382XX
>F4, -1 LP, (reduced contrast)
>F5.6, -1 LP
>F8, -1 LP (best)
>F11, -1 LP, (best)
>F16. -2 LP
>F22, -2 LP (reduced contrast)
>F32, -2 LP (need to reshoot, motion blur)
>
>Now for some comparisons...
>
>DZ 14-54 Zoom at 14mm
>F2.8, 0 LP (reduced contrast)
>F4, 0 LP
>F5.6, 0 LP (best)
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, -1 LP
>F16, -1 LP
>F22, -2 LP (reduced contrast)
>
>DZ 14-54 Zoom at 25mm
>F4, -1 LP
>F5.6, 0 LP (best)
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, -1 LP
>F16, -2 LP
>F22, -2 LP, (reduced contrast)
>
>DZ 14-54 Zoom at 37mm
>F4, -2 LP (surprisingly soft wide open--must be crossover FL)
>F5.6, 0 LP
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, -1 LP
>F16, -1 LP
>F22, -2 LP (reduced contrast, soft)
>
>DZ 14-54 Zoom at 54mm
>F4, -1 LP (really close to 0 LP)
>F5.6, -1 LP (really close to 0 LP)
>F8, 0 LP
>F11, -1 LP
>F16, -1 LP
>F22, -2 LP (reduced contrast)
>
>The older prime lenses have a wider "sweet spot". The bokeh is
>better and the general "feel" is a little nicer. This test
>didn't compare any of that, just resolution.
>
>As always: Your Mileage May Vary (YMMV). If you don't like my
>tests, do you own.
>
>AG
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|