Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Whatever it is, it is

Subject: Re: [OM] Whatever it is, it is
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 22:22:53 -0700
  On 7/7/2010 1:32 AM, Wayne Harridge wrote:
> I guess you'll have to show us a side-by-side comparison of this lens with a 
> few others, same subject, lighting, etc. just different lenses.  I'd be 
> interested to see a demonstration of the Leica difference.

I seldom say anything about it, but I'm bemused by all the comments about lens, 
film, sensor, etc. based on 800-ish 
pixel web images.

It seems to me that the data has been through a lot, then is down sampled, 
losing most of the data, then perhaps 
sharpened for size, adding derivative data. How can anything tiny or subtle 
survive. Although I suppose if it does, it 
must be really special?

I have a few images that just knock my socks off full screen on a 22" monitor. 
Sample 'em down to 800x600, even 
1024x768, and some look pretty good. Some don't really cut it, as they have too 
much small detail that either disappears 
or becomes to prominent or edgy.

Some stuff looks really good at small size, but that's to do with 
subject/treatment, as with painted miniatures, etc.  
Certainly doesn't have much to do with the lens used. I've taken images that 
are distinctly soft full size, whether lens 
or motion blur, and made very sharp web sized images from them.

It's not that I think there aren't differences, just that I don't think most of 
them can be distinguished in full frame 
images downsized to the web. One obvious exception is bad bokeh.

Here's an eight year old Mike Johnston take on a bunch of 50mm lenses. I have 
no particular doubt about what he says 
about all but one of them*. I just don't think those differences an be seen in 
the illustrations. In fact, I'll bet if 
someone mixed them all around, nobody could tell the difference.

Well, yeah, certain folks would project their opinions and proclaim that the 
putative Leica images had a special glow. 
Scramble 'em up and play match lens with image, and I'll bet the results with a 
big group would be random. You know, 
maybe that 50/3.5 portrait does have a little magic glow ...

A. Skeptical Moose

* He clearly hasn't used the Zuiko 50/3.5 Macro for actual macro.
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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