To me, it looks as if the 50 has more contrast?
I can't tell much more, I'm on my laptop display.
These will be good to see when on my bigger display.
Thanks for this!
- both are very sharp, 58mm is a bit sharper at f8
- 50mm has 6 blades, 58mm has 8 blades and so better bokeh stopped down
- 58 is bigger, more weight, ...
etc .... but i never know, which one i like more ...
i'd agree with all of these except the 58 being sharper at f/8. for my copies the 50 was sharper at all apertures. though, to be fair both seemed pretty close to hitting the sensor limit by f/5.6 and maybe subject to a little diffraction by f/8 on my crop cameras.
It seems to match quite well with the tests above and the general perception of the lenses. The 50 is a bit sharper than the 58 especially at wider apertures, but the 58 has nicer bokeh. What I would add is that if you stop them down to f/2 the difference in bokeh seems to get much larger (the 58 has such beautiful bokeh at f/2) and the difference in sharpness is much smaller.
It seems to match quite well with the tests above and the general perception of the lenses. The 50 is a bit sharper than the 58 especially at wider apertures, but the 58 has nicer bokeh. What I would add is that if you stop them down to f/2 the difference in bokeh seems to get much larger (the 58 has such beautiful bokeh at f/2) and the difference in sharpness is much smaller.
ah, but the 50 would have pretty da*n good bokeh at f/2 if it had a decent iris instead of that hexagon machine.
morpheus2891 wrote:
just a test shot WO with my "new" 58/1.2 on my 5D.... I LOVE this lens but man do I need to calibrate my focusing screen! I noticed a little difficulty with my 100/2 but this lens really reveals the mis-calibration (and I'm surprised at just how sharp mine is WO... albeit in a VERY thin slice).
congrats on the new lens! on a side note, why do all bio/chem labs look the same? i've been in so many places where that picture could have been taken without changing a thing other than the people... they could at least use a different color of wood veneer in some of them.
lol... I think it's b/c there's only a few places manufacturing lab furniture (and it just gets rebranded from there)... either that or we're trying to eliminate all variables from our work environment for a more controlled experimental setting
morpheus2891 wrote:
lol... I think it's b/c there's only a few places manufacturing lab furniture (and it just gets rebranded from there)... either that or we're trying to eliminate all variables from our work environment for a more controlled experimental setting
Plus, it is not like the NIH funding guidelines these days allows for room to upgrade lab decor. The real challenge is not to inherit a seat that has a permanent bacterial or fungal infestation...or at least a Coomassie stain that never comes up with ethanol but always manages to stain your leg.
Grenache wrote:
Plus, it is not like the NIH funding guidelines these days allows for room to upgrade lab decor. The real challenge is not to inherit a seat that has a permanent bacterial or fungal infestation...or at least a Coomassie stain that never comes up with ethanol but always manages to stain your leg.
Jim
in designing one of the new research buildings by me they actually ordered a bunch of chairs that didn't fit under the benches (looked just like those in the picture though). totally useless, everybody just discarded them and bought their own either out of pocket or with grant money. at one point i saw an empty lab space with 200 of the discarded chairs.
yea... the building in the picture is actually only about 5 years old... i helped move the lab into the space when it was new and half the fluorescent light fixtures at the desks had cords that weren't long enough to reach the outlets... that's lowest bidder for you (and there are many more examples of it). As for NIH funding, you're absolutely right... not a lot of wiggle room these days (heck, you're lucky to have a job at all). Now as for the coomassie, I'm actually more worried about someone spilling ethidium bromide and then just leaving that on the chairs... make me what to walk around the lab with a UV lamp just to be sure....yea, I know... that would look totally sane
BTW... Jim, I noticed you're a crystallographer ... what do you work on? I'm collaborating with Mavis Agbandje-McKenna and working off of her structures of AAV, that's why I ask
...so I'm told. Nightmare clean up, and I didn't even spill it.
I have solved structures of 25+ proteins, mostly while working for a big pharma company that makes famous blue pills. Kinases, nuclear receptors, proteases and others associated with inflammatory and cardiovascular diseases. I got downsized last year and have since been trying to integrate back into academia. Currently working mostly on grant writing for DNA repair proteins in cancer.
What area are you in, Morpheous?...other than the Matrix
