Good point. The 50-200 seems to give me the most problems focusing out
of all the D.Zuikos I have. When it's focused it seems very nice.
Another less likely possibility is post processing.
Moose already mentioned his favorable experience with AF on his two
C*nons. As I recall part of what motivated Chuck to get his was the AF
in low light.
-jeff
On 11/2/06, Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I doubt you would see a difference in optical quality between the
> lenses. Photodo tested the Olympus and thought it was a pretty good
> lens except for the focus speed which is slow. Plus your E-500 has
> only three focus points which is really not enough, I think, for
> good, fast follow focus. If you are talking about images made while
> tracking moving cars it may not be achieving focus for those moving
> objects.
>
>
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 2, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Ali Shah wrote:
>
> > I took the camera to a race track and maybe it just
> > me. The person who invited me has a Canon 30d and the
> > details in her photos compared to mine were amazing. I
> > had the ZD 50-200 and she had a Canon EF something or
> > the other.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|