Hey, thanks, Joel. Great report on the OM 50/3.5 vs the ZD 14-54 on the
E-1. As you pointed out, it doesn't fully answer my question about the
OM lenses holding up to an 8MP sensor but it sure gave some interesting
info.
I agree that the 50/3.5 has outperformed the 14-54 (at least at this
focal length and aperture) which, to me at least, was an unexpected
result. Now I'm less certain than ever about what an 8MP sensor test
might show.
On a related note I found this page on Luminous Landscape this morning:
<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/pixel-count.shtml> To quote:
"... But they won't be able to get around the fact that the Canon 1Ds,
[11MP full frame sensor] for example, with its 8.8 micron pixels, is
already capable of greater resolution that almost any 35mm format lens.
This came to light when the first test reports started to appear, and
every technical reviewer since has pointed out that the camera is able
to record fine detail greater than standard resolution charts are able
to display. My own pragmatic tests show that to really put this camera
to the test I need to use the best lenses at their optimum apertures,
otherwise the lenses let down the imaging chip."
It's interesting to note that the E-1 has 6.6 micron pixels. I don't
know about the E-300 except that they're clearly smaller. Is
Reichmann's comment about 8.8 micron pixels and 35mm lenses correct?
Although the 50/3.5 outperformed the 14-54 in this test is it possible
that neither one of them is fully utilizing the resolution of the sensor
even on the E-1 let alone the E-300?
I dunno.
Chuck Norcutt
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|