[Guest]

Bokeh looks good (at least with such low-resolution images).

There is no flare, these blobs are just defocused things in background.


Try getting something like this using  sun near image border http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l313/b...5_2845.jpg

[Frank B]

Thanks, that's a relief.  Attached are two images taken into the sun, with no lens hood.  I don't know if they are good tests, as they are so directly into

the sun. They are converted from RAW in Lightroom and conveted to JPG in Photoshop with no post=processing.  Looking forward to your thoughts.

 



 

[Guest]

I think you misunderstand; the only way someone is going to find the 'flaw' due to a single 'dot' is if they look at the image with at 1:1 and know exactly where to look (such as masking with a different lens) and even then they might not spot a difference. Your talking about something (if i understand your description) that is smaller than a speck of dust. It is possible (though unlikely) that such a flaw could catch a ray of light and create a streak but it would have to actually be a fairly deep defect (such as a nick in the element) which I doubt from your description.

-

Believe me as someone who obsessed over new equipment I've been down this path of fret more than once. The optical defect of decentered lens is far greater.

-

Please ignore what I wrote if the mark you are talking about is significantly larger than 2 or 3 specks of dust.

[Frank B]

I have looked at 100% and can spot nothng.  It is one speck and there appears to be another even tinier speck next to it.  As far as I can tell the  defect  is not having a negitive impact on picture quality.  I agree that a decentered lens would be much worse.  Unless, somthing shows up in my images I will keep the lens.   Thanks for your help.

 

 

I think you misunderstand; the only way someone is going to find the 'flaw' due to a single 'dot' is if they look at the image with at 1:1 and know exactly where to look (such as masking with a different lens) and even then they might not spot a difference. Your talking about something (if i understand your description) that is smaller than a speck of dust. It is possible (though unlikely) that such a flaw could catch a ray of light and create a streak but it would have to actually be a fairly deep defect (such as a nick in the element) which I doubt from your description.

-

Believe me as someone who obsessed over new equipment I've been down this path of fret more than once. The optical defect of decentered lens is far greater.

-

Please ignore what I wrote if the mark you are talking about is significantly larger than 2 or 3 specks of dust.

[nandadevieast]

Guys, if you had both the systems, will you go for this lens over a regular 85/1.8?

[Guest]

Well that's a tough one - this lens is better than most 85f1.8 (I presume you are talking about nikon or canon); but it is also a 150mm lens with regards to shooting distance so it is a bit difficult to compare. Having look at a lot of images on the web (not the best source for comment) this lens is incredibly good with regards to image quality but it also has a perspective that I find in many cases a bit annoying for 'street' stuff - so if your happy with a 70-200f4 lens (with most of your pictures closer to 200) then this is the lens to love; but if you really want to shoot with an 85f1.8 (on a ff camera) then there will definitely be an adjustment.

 

(I'm making an assumption that you are talking about an 85f1.8 on a FF and not aps-c).

[Frank B]

Just want to thank all who gave me advice on my decison on whether to exchange my Olympus 75mm f/1.8 or keep it.  The 30 day return period is over and I decided to keep the lens.  I could find no traces in my images created by the tiny 'flaw' I could see looking in the lens.  I am so pleased with the results I am getting from this lens that I simply would not risk getting a replacement that looks perfect, burt is decentered or not as contrasty or sharp.  It is the best lens I have owned. Thanks again for the help.

[Rena]

Hi there, I just got my new 75mm lens and of course took a whole lot of "test" pics. The sharpness is incredible but only upto f/8. After that the images become unbelievably blurred, actually images taken with 70-300 are much sharper. Is this "normal" and my expectations are too high? Of course to return the lens to B&H shouldn't be a problem if I want to forfeit the shipping costs and quite a high customs duty. I feel I am trapped...

 

The first example is f/5.6, the 2nd one is f/16: 

 

[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]

 

[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]

[Guest]

>The sharpness is incredible but only upto f/8

It's ok.

Don't use f/16

[Klaus]

Hi there, I just got my new 75mm lens and of course took a whole lot of "test" pics. The sharpness is incredible but only upto f/8. After that the images become unbelievably blurred, actually images taken with 70-300 are much sharper. Is this "normal" and my expectations are too high? Of course to return the lens to B&H shouldn't be a problem if I want to forfeit the shipping costs and quite a high customs duty. I feel I am trapped...

 

The first example is f/5.6, the 2nd one is f/16: 

 

56.jpg

 

</a> 16.jpg

f/8 = f/16 in conventional terms - do you really need more than that in the real life ?


f/16 is therefore equiv to f/32! On full format cameras images will also be muddy at this setting. This is simply diffraction.