Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Why thee moon is a poor subject for lens testing [was E-500 + O

Subject: [OM] Re: Why thee moon is a poor subject for lens testing [was E-500 + OM->E + 2xA TC + 300/4.5 => 1200/9 ?]
From: "Joel Wilcox" <jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 09:01:53 -0500
On 4/8/07, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Joel Wilcox wrote:
> > The moon shot on my homepage is this combination with the 330:
> >
> > http://myweb.uiowa.edu/jfwilcox
> >
> Not to pick on you; others have been posting moon shots, but you are
> tough and this is when I thought to post about it. :-)
>
> Perceived sharpness is some combination of resolving power, overall
> contrast and edge contrast. The atmosphere is full of varying amounts of
> moisture and dust and there is lots of motion going on within it. So the
> greater the length of atmosphere one shoots through, the greater the
> effect of the atmosphere on the factors that make up sharpness.
>
> The moon is the object that is viewed through the longest distance of
> atmosphere of any object we can photograph and resolve detail with our
> cameras and normal lenses. It therefore seems to me to be the worst
> possible test subject.
>
> The effects of the atmosphere on contrast and edge contrast can be
> largely overcome with post processing, making much more detail visible.
> http://moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Wilcox/Moon.htm

LOL!  I'm glad you had some fun with that!  It out-Mooses the Moose, I'd say.

I appreciate what you share here as a product of your thought about
photographing the moon and the inherent difficulties that poses.  I
never really thought about the moon being difficult to photograph in
virtue of atmosphere, but of course that's got to be an issue.  But
maybe it's not as big a deal as it seems.  Compared to a long-lens
shot in the Smokies, for example, perhaps a shot of the moon actually
cuts through less affective atmosphere?

In any case, I'll hang on to the original if that's all right.  :)

> > I've always found the combo of 2X-A and 300/4.5 to be a trifle soft.
>
> Seriously, I think a lot of that softness is inadequate vibration
> control and/or atmospheric effects.

Yeah, I agree absolutely.  I have always struggled with vibration
control with long lenses on the OMs.

Joel W.

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz