Dirk writes:
<< Would this [mechanical camera vs. electronic camera vibration] make
much difference in the sharpness of photos taken in the real world, as
opposed to the laboratory?? >>
Real world for most photograpers is hand holding. The results are for
the most part worse than tripod shots (also real world), so the
comparison is a mute issue. Is there something in my tests that seem to
not be real world?
I compared results of at least two lenses using an OM-2000 (mechanical)
vs. a OM-4T (electronic). I concluded there is no significant
difference. I like using the OM-2000 in tests because it makes the work
go quicker (due to a shorter self timer delay) and the 90mm f/2 test
showed me the that build tolerances in at least my OM-2000 are dead on.
Keppler wrote an article about other sources of vibration (Modern
Photography, Dec. 1984). They include Diaphragm Connector, Diaphragm,
Mirror, and Shutter. He named what I have been calling "harmonic
vibration" as "oscillation vibration." But while he has repeated written
about camera shake (hand-holding), differences in tripod support, and
mirror lock-up improvements, I have no reference to him measuring the
oscillation vibrations from the diaphragm or the diaphragm connector
(coupling). Yet, rangefinder users have always claimed that is why they
have an advantage over SLR's.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|