Only problem is, the m4/3 7-14 cannot possibly be as sharp in the
corners, because of all the software correction necessary to make the
(near-fisheye) projected image rectilinear. The ZD 7-14 seems *pixel
sharp* right into the corners (which is totally unbelievable in my
experience) and which is simply not possible for the software-stretched
pixels.
It'll come close though, I am sure :-) But yes, I am loving the 7-14...
like you said before. I am *not* loving the deep DOF for normal to tele
lenses, but I have to admit, it's great for ultra-wide angle.
I'd love to see some of your m4/3 work with the 7-14 - where can I go
look?
Dawid
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 14:28 +0200, SwissPace wrote:
> As I have said many times and you have just found out, the 7-14 is a
> very special lens it made the decision very hard to move away from four
> thirds, I have the panasonic micro43 version which is probably as sharp
> but much more prone to flare and hence harder to use.
>
>
> On 02/08/2012 12:36, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> >
> > It's funny how, looking at samples from a Nikon D3X and the new Zeiss
> > Distagon 15mm f/2.8, the E-5 and the 7-14 resolves *no less detail* in
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|