Perhaps it's just a matter of getting familiar with the lens ... the shorter
focal length of the 90 requires a wider aperture than the 135. Both the 90
and 135/4.5 are very nice, with the two stops faster aperture of the 90
giving it an edge IMHO.
I like being able to see the background in Graham's image. Photos with the
background completely blurred can also be nice, but seeing a plant in its
environment often has longer appeal to me. Also as a photographer, Graham's
photo sparks a lot of "what-if" scenarios in my mind ...
I recently was looking through some pictures taken by a 5D with most likely
C*non glass. The out of focus circles had a very sharp circumference with
the center often noticeably darker than the outer part of the circle. It was
almost as distracting as the catadioptric lenses. With the full size image I
would have thought the photographer would have less problem with bokeh
(compared to a user switching from OM to E-System). Hopefully I'll get a
chance to talk with the photographer if he doesn't quickly get burned out
taking real estate pictures.
-jeff
----Original Message Follows----
From: Fernando Gonzalez Gentile <fgnzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Starting the day with a blasphemy [ ;) ] - why could it be that I find my
135/4.5 bokeh more pleasing @f8-f11?
Am I the only one?
Fernando.
on 3/05/2006 05:08, GeeBee at graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wrote:
> Zuiko 90mm f2 macro
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|