thearne3
Regular
- Location
- Ridgefield, CT USA
I have compared my OM 50mm f1.4 with the new Oly 45 f1.8 using the following procedure:
1. Still life with relatively strong back light - composition at roughly portrait distance (5').
2. MF on specific spot (center cactus tip)
3. Shots at all apertures (1.4/1.8, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11) - somehow omitted f16!
4. Tripod, IS off; Tripod moved to try account for 50 vs 45mm FOV (still needed to enlarge the Oly slightly to get to identical FOV)
Processing of OOC jpegs in Aperture:
Presets: Auto Color, Auto Contrast, Definition .3, Vibrancy .1
Obviously, this creates a lot of data!
My goals are to assess the lenses based on what's important to me: sharpness at center and corner, color, contrast and bokeh - at or near wide open. I show below Master (untouched OOC), Adjusted (per Presets above), Center and Corner. Center and Corner crops are 100%.
I chose f1.4 and f2.0 for the OM and Oly, respectively. Why? Because I was surprised by the results! Oly on the left in all screen shots. I could have shown both wide open, but the difference for the Oly between f1.8 and 2 is negligible.
The only clear 'win' that I see is the Oly corner sharpness and contrast. Even wide open the OM 50 is a winner if edge sharpness is not critical. Bokeh is similar, but the OM is a little smoother.
The last two screenshots are the two lenses corners at wide open to f4.
OM: gets much better going from 1.4 to 2.0, then gradual improvement.
Oly: starts good, very gradually better.
Both: Peak at f5.6
Master:
Adjusted:
Center:
Corner:
OM Corner: f1.4, 2, 2.8, 4 (tl,tr,bl,br)
Oly Corner: f1.8, 2, 2.8, 4 (tl,tr,bl,br)
1. Still life with relatively strong back light - composition at roughly portrait distance (5').
2. MF on specific spot (center cactus tip)
3. Shots at all apertures (1.4/1.8, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11) - somehow omitted f16!
4. Tripod, IS off; Tripod moved to try account for 50 vs 45mm FOV (still needed to enlarge the Oly slightly to get to identical FOV)
Processing of OOC jpegs in Aperture:
Presets: Auto Color, Auto Contrast, Definition .3, Vibrancy .1
Obviously, this creates a lot of data!
My goals are to assess the lenses based on what's important to me: sharpness at center and corner, color, contrast and bokeh - at or near wide open. I show below Master (untouched OOC), Adjusted (per Presets above), Center and Corner. Center and Corner crops are 100%.
I chose f1.4 and f2.0 for the OM and Oly, respectively. Why? Because I was surprised by the results! Oly on the left in all screen shots. I could have shown both wide open, but the difference for the Oly between f1.8 and 2 is negligible.
The only clear 'win' that I see is the Oly corner sharpness and contrast. Even wide open the OM 50 is a winner if edge sharpness is not critical. Bokeh is similar, but the OM is a little smoother.
The last two screenshots are the two lenses corners at wide open to f4.
OM: gets much better going from 1.4 to 2.0, then gradual improvement.
Oly: starts good, very gradually better.
Both: Peak at f5.6
Master:
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Adjusted:
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Center:
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Corner:
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
OM Corner: f1.4, 2, 2.8, 4 (tl,tr,bl,br)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Oly Corner: f1.8, 2, 2.8, 4 (tl,tr,bl,br)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)