>
> If all of the tests were set up the same, why are some images and
> highlights
> different sizes?
>
Those are 100% crops in Studio 2. The positioning is a little different
because of something else we discovered about these lenses--they aren't all
exactly lined up the same. Hmmm. (although some of this difference may
possibly be caused by changing position of the sensor even though IS was
turned off, but after the camera resets with lens changes, who knows...)
Same with the apparent focal-length of #1 not quite looking like 50mm even
though the exif says 50mm.
As to the highlight size, shape and quality differences, well, this is the
point of the test. Wait till you see the 50/1.4, 50/1.8 and 50/3.5
comparative shots!
Stopped down to F8 and beyond, the differences become extremely wide.
I've yapped unendingly about aspherical elements and also about the
restricting of the size of the out-of-focus blobs with modern lenses. This
comparitive illustrates it perfectly. I truly believe that this restrictive
blob-expansion is what makes so many modern digital images look so flat AND
why FourThirds has been such a whipping boy for inability to isolate subject
from background. DoF calculators assume symmetrical lens designs and
non-aspherical elements.
As to F4.0, I chose this for this quick-and-dirty comparative because all
lenses supported that aperture at that focal length. When opened up to
widest aperture, of course the differences get even bigger.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|