jlehet wrote:
Since we still don't have a kitchen, and it's been a long week without one, a friend invited us over for dinner. On the way to his place I stopped to photograph these cumulo-ominous clouds over a cornfield, what passes for infinity around here. I'm not disappointed compared to Loxia. Sharp and brilliant. This is just Lightroom default yellow filter with shadows pulled up. If I worked on it a little I would burn dodge the foreground and crop or burn the extra sky.
At his place I was photographing a little: gardens, chickens old buildings and all, with the CV 65. After a while I put on the OM 50/2, which I had in my bag and I was curious to compare. I did these exposures some time apart and without a direct intention of comparing identical images. I was going for a general sense. Reviewing the images, when I got to an similar garden shot with the OM 50/2 I thought, "Now this is nice bokeh, definitely nicer bokeh." But then I put the images side by side, I think the CV might actually be nicer bokeh. The OM is sort of wilder, a little more character, which is one thing I like about that lens. But the CV is very nice. (I know, just a flower scenario). Of course the CV is sharper (focus on stamens of foreground anemone. Both at f2.
I think the funny thing is that we have expectations, and I've been reading people complaining about the bokeh of the CV enough to almost start believing it, at least maybe enough to bias my view.
these are all just jpgs exported out of lightroom
clouds:
CV garden:
OM 50/2 garden:
Go up in focal length (OM 90/2) instead of down (OM 50/2) in the comparison and you might have a different (bokeh) result.
