04-18-2011, 01:26 PM
[quote name='karlmera' timestamp='1303111496' post='7711']
I shot at 1:3(f2), 1:4 is not possible with a dslr. But 1:1 is bad, and also reversed. My conclusion is that the lens would be best usable only at 1:4 unreversed.
I wrote that the 60mm AF-S is better.
I used it on a D300.
[/quote]
Sorry, for some weird reason I missed the "AF-S", so I wondered if it was the old or the new 60mm.
1:4 should about be possible on my EOS with the right thin adapter. The results I am getting at 1:2.5 are very good in the center, with flat subjects the sharpness wide open is stunning, but I do see some "coma" at the borders so I can imagine that 1:1 will stretch the optics a bit too much.
It should be good reversed at around 4:1, but I do not have a reversal ring/adapter yet.
I find the bokeh quite agreeable too.
I shot at 1:3(f2), 1:4 is not possible with a dslr. But 1:1 is bad, and also reversed. My conclusion is that the lens would be best usable only at 1:4 unreversed.
I wrote that the 60mm AF-S is better.
I used it on a D300.
[/quote]
Sorry, for some weird reason I missed the "AF-S", so I wondered if it was the old or the new 60mm.
1:4 should about be possible on my EOS with the right thin adapter. The results I am getting at 1:2.5 are very good in the center, with flat subjects the sharpness wide open is stunning, but I do see some "coma" at the borders so I can imagine that 1:1 will stretch the optics a bit too much.
It should be good reversed at around 4:1, but I do not have a reversal ring/adapter yet.
I find the bokeh quite agreeable too.