> Right behind the incredible 100/2 and two Great Whites, tied with the third
> Great White.
As Moose so eloquently said, there are several things to consider in
the "sharpness" war. For pure edge-detection sharpness, of all my
lenses I've had blessed to spend lots of time with, the OMZ 28/2 and
100/2 are definitely the sharpest. The 50/3.5 and 100/2.8 are right
behind them by a smidge.
However, when it comes to those strange subtle sharpness things which
some may refer to as micro-contrast, and other such nuances, I'd
reverse it and put the 50/3.5 and 100/2.8 in the lead. Both lenses
bring out the texture.
But I'm not entirely sure. With a full-blown "test" I may prove myself
wrong and the facts will prove otherwise. But I know what I see in my
pictures and how I shoot with the lenses. It very well could be that
I'm allowing the lens selections to bias the way I shoot and see. When
I have the 35/2 lens on the camera, I'm going to exploit the
characteristics of that lens. The 100/2 is such a heavy beast that if
I'm going to use it, I'm going to USE it.
The 50/3.5 was my "normal" lens for a long time. I had no other 50mm.
My only complaint was that it curved the horizon at infinity. And the
bokeh was absolutely nothing exploitable. But the lens was exceptional
for tripod use when I was trying to achieve a standardized deep-focus
landscape shot.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|