Thank you, I knew we could count on you! Very interesting to see the
results. So, the Zuiko 35mm lenses are good, but not great. As we all
knew.
Of course, a 5D MkII is merciless in this regard, so I suspect the 35mm
lenses will make film users happy still.
Every now and then, I think about getting a nice, late-copy 35mm f/2.0.
It just seems like it would compliment the 21mm F2 so well.
regards,
Dawid
On 23 Feb 2011, at 4:19 AM, C.H.Ling wrote:
> I'm not a fan of 35mm especially the Zuiko 35/2.8, I have focus
> problem with
> both 35/2 and 2.8 while the 40/2 and 24/2 seem much better, don't
> know why.
>
> Anyway, here are some Zuiko test shots made today:
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1303_3528atF28.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1304_3528atF56.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1305_352atF2.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1306_352atF28.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1307_352atF56.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1308_24F2atF2.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_1309_24F2atF4.JPG
>
> Some test shots made before:
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_3928_2848_35F4.JPG
> (Zuiko 28-48 at 35mm F4)
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_3663_40F2_F2.JPG
> http://www.accura.com.hk/IMG_3664_40F2_F4.JPG
>
> All focus with 10x liveview. RAW, converted with DPP at sharpness
> '0' (no
> sharpen).
>
> C.H.Ling
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dawid Loubser" <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>> Have a look at this post:
>>
>> http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1554718&postcount=1294
>>
>> It's, of course, a small web image, but the person claims it to be
>> shot wide
>> open, and to my eyes, the resolving power and freedom of coma looks
>> really,
>> really good right into the corners. If this was shot on fine-grained
>> film, it
>> looks like it could happily print quite big!
>>
>> I know they are two wildly different lenses, but by comparison, I
>> stopped my 21mm f/2
>> down to f/4 for this following shot, but if you carefully examine it
>> (again, small size,
>> sorry) it's clear that the 35/2.8 looks better in its corners at f/
>> 2.8
>> than what my
>> 21mm does in it's corners at f/4.
>>
>> http://philosomatographer.deviantart.com/art/The-
>> Specialists-194636278
>>
>> P.S. Despite Moose's agreeable cropping advice on this image, I have
>> to say, when I look
>> at my 12x16in print of this image, it's quite extraordinary (the
>> quality). At this
>> print size, I am not sure that I "miss" the quality from medium
>> format
>> (which I shoot
>> mostly). Sometimes, 35mm film can be surprisingly nice, despite the
>> fiddly small negatives.
>> All aspects of one's technique needs to come together though, and
>> I've
>> found at these print
>> sizes, the right enlarger lens makes a significant difference.
>> (The last model EL-Nikkor 50mm f/2.8N is stupendous, my search for
>> the
>> right enlarger lens
>> ended when I got it a year ago.)
>>
>> Anyway, what do you guys think? Does anybody have a shot like the top
>> one (night shot, bright lights,
>> distant cityscape) with one of the fast wides (21/24/28 F2) to
>> compare? C.H. Ling, you
>> always surprise us with some good test shots, have you any?
>>
>>
>> cheerio,
>> Dawid
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
|
