www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - JML 21, Canon 35, Oly 38 with Sea Urchin Spine at 5x
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
JML 21, Canon 35, Oly 38 with Sea Urchin Spine at 5x

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PaulFurman



Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: SF, CA, USA

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 9:53 am    Post subject: JML 21, Canon 35, Oly 38 with Sea Urchin Spine at 5x Reply with quote

Some tests of 3 lenses with pretty clear results that surprised me. I think my step was too much but still plenty to see here. I thought I had all the lenses stopped down to f/3.5 but the 38 needed to be darkened one stop. In an ideal world I'd have tried different apertures and step distances but these things are endless.

Sea urchin spine, near the base where it attaches (seems like a perfect benchmark for testing lenses.
5x magnification full frame 12MP stacks of 42 at 25 micron increments, 6 second exposures. All sharpened rather heavily at minimum 0.5 pixel radius.

Corner & center crops full pixels:


Full frames link to original 12MP versions.

21mm f/3.5 JML


35mm f/2.8 Canon MP-B


38mm f/2.8 Olympus


Conclusions:

The Canon 35 isn't as good as I thought. Perhaps because the Oly is faster than I thought? That would explain why I didn't like the Oly; things are so darn blurry and smaller steps are needed.

All of them hold up quite well in the corners on full frame.

The JML is very nearly as good as the Oly, hardly worth mentioning the difference. Interestingly, jpeg file size can be a good way of objectively measuring and here the numbers are:
straight out of zerene:
6,265 - 6,307 - 6,452
web versions from lightroom, sharpened & compression 80:
3,195 - 2,740 - 3,272
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Pau
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Posts: 4885
Location: Valencia, Spain

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paul, very good comparation.
I need to test the JML against my old Oly 20mm f3.5 (single coated) but I think I already know the answer: the JML may be the winner.
_________________
Pau
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PaulFurman



Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: SF, CA, USA

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pau, my previous (first) test at 3x put the 20mm f/2 and 38mm Oly against the JML and the 20mm Oly did poorly, perhaps because it's out of it's range of 5.3x or a number of other issues. The 3.5 version is rated for 4.3x so that's certainly not a foregone conclusion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group