To prove that my eyes are older than yours Fred:
2,6,1,3,5,4
Jack
--- Fred Widall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since lots of people are testing lenses at present I
> thought I'd join
> in - hope you don't mind. Besides its a really
> crappy day here with
> lots of snow and high winds, so what else is there
> to do.
>
> I pinned up a print out of the USAF target to my
> wall (approx four feet
> from the camera), mounted my *istDS on a sturdy
> tripod, mounted a variety of
> lenses all set to F8 on the camera, fired the camera
> in RAW mode with 2
> second delay (i.e. mirror up). Opened the images in
> PSCS, cropped out the
> center section of the target, converted to JPG and
> loaded them to this
> page.
>
>
http://www.ist.uwaterloo.ca/~fwwidall/LensTest/index.html
>
> The lenses I chose for this highly scientific and
> precise testing were
>
> 1) DA18-55mm F3.5-5.6 (@50mm)
> 2) F70-210mm F4.5-5.6 (@70mm from 6 feet)
> 3) FA28-90mm F3.6-5.6 (@50mm)
> 4) M 50mm F1.7
> 5) S-M-C Takumar 35mm F3.5 (with K adapter mounted
> on Sakar 1.7x
> converter)
> 6) SMC Takumar 55mm F2 (with K adapter)
>
> For what its worth to my aging eyes the ranking is
>
> 6,4,1,5,3,2
>
> Nothing too surprising in that the prime lenses seem
> to be better, even
> the one on the Sakar teleconverter.
>
> If the weather improves tomorrow I may try repeating
> the tests but use
> a more distant target.
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Fred Widall,
> URL: http://www.ist.uwaterloo.ca/~fwwidall
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
