Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] : Digital versus analogue

Subject: [OM] : Digital versus analogue
From: "Brian Swale" <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 14:09:46 +1300
Hello all

Earlier I wrote
> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 19:37:16 +1300
> Hello all
> 
> Looks as though I have to eat humble pie regarding my condemnation of the 
> DZ 14-45 lens on the E-1.
> 
> I was convinced that a Zuiko on the OMO4Ti would beat it hollow on the 
> same topic (Roses,
http://homepages.caverock.net.nz/~bj/photography/zuikoholics/recent5.htm  )
> 
> but I have to admit that is possibly not the case.  I took nearly a full roll 
> of
> Fuji Reala 100 asa  on those same blooms a couple of days later and I am NOT
> happy with the results.  I do acknowledge that the lighting conditions were
> different. Overcast with nearly no direct light from the sun for the E-1 
> shots.
> Ideal. There was a lot of direct sunlight for the OM shots and for some I 
> shaded
> the flowers with my hands. I had thought the Zuiko 100/2 at F/8 would be 
> sharp,
> but it did not provide the depth of field, and I'm not too sure about the
> sharpness either. The leaf detail was bad, and with the direct lighting, the
> shiny leaves were all blown out.
> 
> I was especially disappointed with the Zuiko 35~105; it did not have the 
> normal close focus I thought it had, so I used the macro facility this lens 
> has.
> Not good for 6 x 8 prints.   However, I Do know the DZ 14-45 is not good for
> distant landscapes, whereas the Zuiko 35~105 is tack sharp even at 12 x 18.
> 
> By the way, all prints made in the same lab, same Fuji machine.

I had forgotten that although the Zuiko 100/2 is very sharp, and *will* focus 
down to about 70cm, the depth of focus is very shallow, even stopped down. 
Some of you might remember the head and shoulders shot I made of a pet 
rabbit using this lens. I think it was in a Solstice Exchange prior to 2003. 
This showed the shallow DOF very well.

So, even though the 100/2 and the 14~45 DZ are of more or less equivalent 
focal length at the long end, the DOF of each are orders of magnitude apart.

I should have used a Zuiko of much shorter focal length - 40 or 35 mm, to get 
the DOF I needed. And my shade umbrella to eliminate the blown-out 
highlights.  Of course, the perspective will be different  :-((

I might try doing similar shots again, but the original blooms are ruined now. 
Too old, if indeed the gardeners have left them on the bushes.

Brian 

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [OM] : Digital versus analogue, Brian Swale <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz