Don't worry, many of the non L lenses and some L lenses also has purple
fringe. Some Zuiko zooms also do quite well, the 65-200, 50-250, 28-48 are
ok. Don't know about the 80-200/4 Nikkor but the AF 180/2.8 do show some PF
under strong water reflections but not bad.
The 35-70/3.6 and 85-250/5 was said to be very good according to Olympus
Lens Handbook, it can replace single focal length lenses.... but it seems
over stated for the 85-250. The 35-70/3.6 has very good resolution but the
PF at 70mm is also very serious wide open. The Zuiko is not alone, Tamron SP
35-80/2.8-4 also has strong PF same for the SP 70-210 3.5-4.
BTW, I'm not really picky but some lenses' PF are just so serious that can
be seen at a glance.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fernando Gonzalez Gentile"
mmmmmmmmmmmm - and you were kind enough not to include the shadow on the
Castrol bottle in the crop, but the border of the green leave and the
shadow of the knob over that green whatever-it-is-called is enough proof.
OTOH, the 300 @ ƒ/4,5 shows blue or neutral instead of purple, and where
purple is very strong at ~250 @ƒ/5 there is still a little purple (I'm
optimistically estimating 1/5th) in the 300 @ ƒ/4,5. Over all glimpse at
the 300mm shots shows it more neutral and maybe yellow perhaps, while
the zoom is warmer. I thought this to be due to changing lighting
conditions (the zoom test was done after the prime, warmer sunlight),
but now I've seen another reason.
Mr. Ling, <g> are we not pixel peeping a 15-11 old zoom, second
generation after the 75~150? I remember that when it was first
introduced, MPhotography found it soft at its long end, and complained
on this (tested together with the 35~70 ƒ/3,6 - found outstanding). I
wonder how the contemporary one touch 80~200/4 Nikkor everyone was using
at that time, would stand up in this very test - and the two touch
80~200/4 Canon FD I happened to use once, on a A1.
Wow, I feel my new purchase much better justified now - nonetheless, if
I were to walk along the same Paris / Rome streets I did during 1991 I
would carry the 85~250 instead of the 200/4 or the 300/4,5. And would
have used KM instead of Ektachrome 100 (I was advised against using KM
in Paris, because Kodak should send them to London for processing -- and
I obeyed !!. I was young then ... )
;-)
Fernando.
C.H.Ling wrote:
> Thanks for the sample, unfortunately (fortunately, my lens is not alone)
> there is purple fringe as seen on this crop.
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_2064es.jpg
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 9:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [OM] Hats off - Zuiko 300mm f/4, 5 <--> 85~250mm f/5
> shootout,
> by Chuck.
>
>
>
>> I'm sending you the full size image and you'll see there's no purple
>> fringe.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>> C.H.Ling wrote:
>>
>>> Good for you with a 85-250 that you like, my sample has strong purple
>>> fringe under test target.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
