Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] E-30

Subject: Re: [OM] E-30
From: "C.H.Ling" <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 11:07:12 +0800
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>

>
> You mean the grey step bar on page one of the reviews? As my monitor is
> adjusted, the far right step is the same black as the page background
> and I can see the differences across all the other steps. And yes, their
> samples generally look good to me. And I generally like the color in the
> images you post, so maybe it is mostly taste.
>

Yes, that's the I think we have more taste difference than monitor 
calibration. Actually, I see you have changed your preference a little with 
time. Recently your modifications are a little subtle than before in the 
tone and LCH. It is more close to my acceptance range but still a little 
more than I would have done for some images :-)

> Another thing I've mentioned before, but not in this context, is
> relative sharpness of individual vision. The vision in my right eye is
> 20/10; I can resolve detail at 20 feet that 'normal' vision can't see
> until only 10 feet away. Every once in a while, I notice how much less
> sharp things are with my 20/20 left eye alone and think "Wow, so that's
> how most people see the world, soft."
>
> I see the world with more detail and sharper edges than average. That
> may mean I process images so they look different than what other folks
> may, attempting to duplicate the world as it looks to them. Particularly
> true on this list, perhaps, as there are a lot of members with aging
> vision, or so they report.
>

Yes, my eyes are not that good now, for my left eye the astigmatism cannot 
be corrected completely with glasses for close object (distance object is 
ok), the right eye is much better but still not as good as young. But all 
these does not make me see the world soft, I like details that's why I 
pursuit for a good focus, things just within DOF is not acceptable to me. I 
like the details in that image but just a bit surprise to see the fence is 
sharper in the film shot (I expect DOF cover the range well):

http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/V-10009.jpg  (9.4MB)

http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_0917.JPG (6.8MB)

I believe people are not trying to duplicate what they see by soften the 
image, it is what the camera recorded. I believe the camera record is not 
wrong it is just the lighting condition have represented, any server 
adjustment will make them unreal to me.

> So perhaps my interest in seeing more detail in the trunk, sharper edges
> in the stuff below it, etc., are related to differences in our vision?
>

I agree your trunk adjustment is ok but I don't think it is bad to left it 
as is, it depends on the photographer's intension, if he would like to 
record the details on the trunk it failed.

I'm greatly influenced by the Olympus style especially for macro, the images 
in VisionAge are deeply in my mind, most of the shots were wide open. It is 
difference from your highly sharpened images. Also differ from the N*kon 
brochure shots I have seen in the pass, they use F16 for flower shots.

> The threads about focusing problems and viewfinder problems mostly seem
> strange to me, as I almost never have a problem. I assume that's mostly
> because I can more easily see focus in the viewfinder. When the AF in
> the 5D misses slightly, I tend to just slightly move the central AF spot
> and try again until the part I want is hit, reframe and shoot.
> Sometimes, especially with the 90/2.8 macro and its easy, push-pull
> AF/MF switching and nice focus action, I'll switch to MF.
>

The AF focusing problem in E-3 and E-520 were clearly not my fault, I use 
tripod and test more than a thousand time. The error is very consistent and 
repeatable. I do better with MF so my eyes even not good but still better 
than the AF they offered. With the modification I have done to the 5D II, I 
can do perfect focus with it. I will not accept a AF camera that need my 
attention to the focusing, of course I will make sure the AF point is on the 
target I wanted.

For the scanning job I'm doing, with over 7000 images more than 1/3 of the 
longer shots were with focus error (ok, many of them focus to the back was 
human error). I think they just didn't see the focus error in 4x6 print so 
there were no complain on AF error in the pass.

I never have focus problem with macro and they were MF only (except the 
butterfly shots with DZ50-200). The more problematic one were wide angles at 
low light, now the A900 focusing screen is working better than all the 
focusing screens I have used in the pass.

C.H.Ling


-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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