On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 4:08 AM Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ming Thien's review mentioned exceptional flare resistance. Some examples
> in a DPReview forum, with things like bare
> tree limbs in the corners, etc. showed them to be very similar - until
> the sun is in the corner at widest FL, then
> contrast and detail fall dramatically on the 14-150. The 14-150 II
> probably fixes that, with Nano coatings.
> So, I took a chance on a clean used one
from B&H; I can return it if it doesn't do the job. I haven't done that
> with it so far. But it sure looks like 200 mm is fine, at least after
> processing, which is what matters to me.
I feel that I would not be able to make any judgment from your examples
because the lens characteristics are sort of overwhelmed by Moose Mojo.
Certainly that's an interesting lens, especially if you just can't carry
more than one lens. If you like it, that's good enough for me. I can't be
trusting my lying eyes about lens qualities in your photos, but I do trust
you. I know that you have the tools and skills to make good photographs
from inferior lenses if it were to come to that. The better angel on your
shoulder should be telling you that as well.
I am intrigued by the yellow lily photo above. I haven't been able to
capture the yellow of daffodils and irises in our yard except very rarely
until the EM-1iii. I find the yellow color usually wants to block up and I
want the suggestion at least of some translucence. I cannot fake that
delicate balance in PP. Either I catch it at the shutter or I don't. Your
lily, if that's what it is, is not really the kind of yellow I'm referring
to, but it reminded me of it, and the whole feeling of light in your photo
is very lovely.
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/