At 03:50 PM 8/12/2002 +0800, you wrote:
"Richard F. Man" wrote:
>
> Ah! Good point. The truth is probably somewhere in between? Anyway, here
> are two shots demonstrating what I mean:
> http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/ari-and-buddha.jpg
> http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/ari-and-buddha2.jpg
>
> One is with the OM4T 40/2. I forgot what shutter speed, but it is low.
> 1/30-1/60 at best. The other is C3000. I think it's easy to tell which one
> is which :-) Too bad we didn't notice her hands were in opposite order!
Hi Richard,
Very nice shots, don't forget there is in-camera sharpening on the DC.
Lo! (anyone else read Bored of the Rings in their misspent youth?) You are
of course right. Somehow I forget that... and I guess it is a blind spot of
mine, I usually do Photoshop sharpening at the end, and somehow when I
first looked at the OM4 picture, I didn't even think of using sharpening to
"save it." I was just immediately disappointed at the sharpness difference...
You can also do the same for the 40/2 shot (very mild sharpening added
here):
http://www.accura.com.hk/ari-and-buddha3.jpg
The 1/30s shutter may also added some softness. BTW the 40/2 without
flash look much better than the C3000 with flash turn on :-) If my
I agree. Your changed version is much better. Another reason I like to not
to use flash on the OM is demonstrated here: it looks less flat and more 3-D!
memory serve me well there is a 40/2 shot (full page) on the OM System
Lens Handbook, the photo looks very sharp and aperture was F2 or 2.8
only. Anyone has the book on hand may have a look.
C.H.Ling
Thank you CH. You came through again.
So much to learn....
// richard http://www.imagecraft.com
[ For technical support, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ]
< 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 >
|