Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Sometimes, the 'bad' lenses aren't so bad

Subject: [OM] Re: Sometimes, the 'bad' lenses aren't so bad
From: Chris Crawford <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 00:04:55 -0600
That's a lot lower number than the one I had but the results are excellent.
I used to get soft pictures shooting my 1.4 and my 1.8's wide open in low
light but I think it was inaccurate focusing, not the lens, that was the
problem. I always had trouble focusing in low light with my OM's with the
1-13 screen (the standard OM screen). I later got a 2-13 for each of my
OM-4T bodies and I have had no problem with soft images wide open with my
50's. The only lens I have that really is soft wide open is the 40mm f2,
which everyone seems to say is not very good wide open. The 50 1.8 is a
sharper lens wide open by a long way and is a little better stopped down
than the 40, but I like the 40's bokeh and the focal length is great for
candid street work.


-- 
Chris Crawford
Photography & Graphic Design
Santa Fe, New Mexico

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com  My portfolio

http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com  My latest work!

http://www.plumpatrin.com  Something the world NEEDS.



On 10/13/07 11:31 PM, "Dan Mitchell" <danmitchell@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Chris Crawford wrote:
>> The 1.4 I had was very sharp
>> and yours seems to be too....what aperture did you shoot at?
> 
>   Those were at 1.4, yup; s/n on this lens is 408,000ish.
> 
>   -- dan
> 
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

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