I agree with Dave; both look pretty good with the Zuik seeming slighly
softer in the scans. I don't do specific testing, but look for what
happens with pinpoints of specular highlights at varying depths behind and
in front of the critical focus distance as the situation presents itself.
Joel's posting of the shoot-off was most encouraging as I have an 85/2 but
haven't shot anything with it yet that would reveal its bokeh
characteristics. I've been very happy with the bokeh of my 135/2.8 MC,
with and without an extension tube (not that a tube would make any
difference); had some Kodachromes shot with it scanned recently:
http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/johnlind/olympus/olympusgallery/om73.html
http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/johnlind/olympus/olympusgallery/om74.html
Be persistent. Xoom.com is *still* having problems (404's and "reset by
peer"); it has been slightly better recently, but not much!
What you might try next Joel is an experiment to compare what the bokeh
looks like in front of the DOF; this can be different than from behind it.
I was looking around for a bokeh test on a macro found a while back, but
cannot locate the link to it :-(
Thanks for the shootout!
-- John
At 15:22 9/3/00 , Dave Bulger wrote:
>Joel,
>
>Great bokeh on both shots, but I gotta say that the Zuiko's bokeh is
>slightly softer than the Nikkor's. I doubt that it would be noticeable
>other than via a side by side comparison, however.
>
>Dave
>
< 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 >
|