Thanks to all of you who responded to my inquiry. Just as a reminder, the end
goal of this exercise is not to have a camera feuds, but to determine if I
ended up with a lemon.
One thing I missed mentioning the first time around, was the fact that A200 RAW
files always are on the soft side, but...they sharpen really well. I think my
first impression about A65 being inferior in terms of sharpness, was due to
that and also the inability to sharpen further its JPEG's and TIFF's. Actually,
my initial impression is that one can try to make the RAW A65 files just as
sharp as the JPEG's, but thats it. No real advantage in shooting RAW.
To make it less challenging, I have put up new files up for your review here:
http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=12748
They are pictures taken with the A200 and A65. The latter were taken either
with the kit 18-55 SAM lens or the Minolta AF 50mm/1.7 where I used f8 for
both, since the reviews show that this is the focal length where both are at
its sharpest. I used f4.5 while setting up the A200 since AG's tests show that
its its sharpest focal length.
It looks like the format of both cameras is slightly different, but I assure
you that both times I shot at approximately the same focal length. It just that
the image ratios from the A200 are slightly smaller, ie yielding a more "square
image".
I hope your programs can open up the A65's RAW files. My PS CS2 cant, that's
why the first time around I had everything converted to TIFF. I also added the
JPEGs that came out of the A65.
Have fun and let me know what you find.
Thanks in advance.
Best
Boris
P.S. I honestly think that files from the A65 look smudged, no matter how much
I try to sharpen them. But also was unable to sharpen the ones from the A200 to
the levels I am used to.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|