On 6/17/2014 10:09 PM, Willie Wonka via olympus wrote:
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.
I'll natter on some more, but to cut to the point - no, I don't believe you got a lemon. Where lens quality and focus
come together, detail is quite nice.
I don't see any of the smearing I saw in your first example, and which I said then might not have anything to do with
the sensor system.
On 6/18/2014 7:57 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Zone-10 is back. I downloaded the raw files but they aren't recognized by PS or ACR unless they're renamed to include
the file's suffix as its file type. For example, PICT0924_MRW must become PICT0924.MRW. After converting them I did
compare them but they're still very hard to compare. The A200 file looks OK up to its 8MP limit but pales in the
detail department compared to 24MP files. The primary problem with comparing the A65 files with 2 different lenses is
that the images are not the same size. The kit lens 35mm equivalent focal length is reported as 69mm but for
comparison with the 50mm is should be 75mm. So the kit lens image is smaller and hard to compare.
I didn't bother to look as the A200 images. The first set of images made it clear that they are inferior in detail, as
expected.
I found the same difficulty Chuck did with the different object sizes from different effective focal lengths. I also
found that the focal planes differ. If one looks only at one or two points, it's easy to decide one lens is better than
the other. Pick other points, and the reverse seems true, because one or the other is more out of focus.
Look at the foreground tree trunks, and the zoom looks better. License plate, and they are equal, sticker on the house
door, and the prime is clearer. The zoom is focused quite a few feet closer to the camera than the prime.
As with most cameras, there is a tiny bit of noise even at base ISO. Not a problem, unless you sharpen, which tends to
exaggerate the noise. Here's a 100% sample, with a little bit of NeatImage, then two pixel radius deconvolution with
FocusMagic. <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Boris/Zoom_18-55cr.htm> Cleans up very nicely. The slightly
softer upper left corner is just DOF at work.
Taking comparison shots that may help determine which lens is 'sharper' - makes fine details clearer, (As opposed to
being 'better', which is both more complex and more personal.) is not trivially easy.
In this case, you need a tripod, to adjust the zoom so that the top and bottom of the subject are the same for both and
use live view and a magnified view to manually focus on the same place.
In this case, the zoom looks better in general, because it's focused on the more interesting, more detailed parts of the
subject.
Anyway, Boris, I think you should go forth and take pictures, without worrying whether lens or camera is OK, 'cause they
are.
Moose D'Opinion
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|