Memory is coming back and now, I now remember the vibration issue. I did not
store my photos in a way for me to remember what was taken with that lens.
Probably some discussion in the way back archives.
WayneS
At 2/6/2019 03:34 PM, ken wrote:
>...
>> I never found the 300/4.5 all that good. You must have an exceptional one.
>
>I can thank Jim Timpe for this one. I've found it to be an
>interestingly mixed bag of a lens. When used on film cameras, I
>absolutely love the bokeh and overall rendering of the lens. It is
>actually extremely sharp, but it is highly vibration-prone on the OM
>bodies. When used on 4/3 cameras, the dispersion and purple-fringing
>is problematic, but is a non-issue with the Canon 6D. The lens is
>"pixel sharp" and exceeds the resolution of the sensor.
>
>One photo that I think perfectly illustrates the look/feel of the
>300/4.5 is here (second picture):
>
>http://zone-10.com/d1/node/219
>
>While I'm sure other lenses come close, I think there is just
>something organic to this image and my experience with the 300/4.5 is
>consistently so. It's certainly one of my "money lenses".
>
>(Silvernosed, of course)
>
>AG Schnozz
>--
>_________________________________________________________________
>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/
|