On Sat, Feb 4, 2012, at 09:06 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> I shot with Joel's 90/2 and 85/2 as well as my 100/2 and 100/2.8. In
> aperture-priority mode I shot at each aperture. Blurries kicked in
> with a vengence past 1/15. No surprises there. I'm not perfect.
>
> But what has gotten me puzzled is that at all apertures both 100mm
> lenses out performed the 85 and 90. And not by a small margin either.
> Technically, these lenses should all be relatively close to each
> other. So, here is what I'm thinking. As smooth as the E-1 is (and it
> is extremely smooth), I might be getting some shutter vibration that
> shows up at the shorter focal length lenses. Yet, something else I
> noticed and even verbalized it when doing the testing. Both 100mm
> lenses "snapped" into focus whereas the 90/2 and 85/2 weren't quite so
> definite. Just maybe my focus is a bit off, but at that I should have
> seen it show up elsewhere in the photo of the mustard bottle. Hmm.
> Upon closer examination, the 90/2 and 85/2 MIGHT have been focused a
> touch closer, but that just shows that I couldn't manually focus them
> correctly.
>
> I'm wondering how Joel's tests with the 5D turned out.
I posted my results by report a couple days ago. I think my testing may
eliminate some variables, as I was shooting at 1600, which is still
pretty tight on the Canaan. I also used the focus confirm in each case,
which one might assume rules out misjudgments. In my view, the 85 is
great, the 90 greater, and the 100 greatest. I didn't test the 100/2.8.
I have several thoughts. 1) My experience matches yours substantially.
2) I did not notice any snapping into focus, which seems like a somewhat
unquantifiable characteristic of the focusing experience. I think we
know what you mean, but I'm not sure it means anything other than it is
very sharp and focuses with assurance easily. 3) But I also wonder if
the experience is not simply reflective of the staging of increasingly
greater telephoto lengths. Since we used the same subject for each
shot, that subject was larger as the length of the lens increased, and
the differentiation of the subject from the background was greater as
well. Hence, "snapping" into focus.
Joel W.
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|