software correction, we all do it why shouldn't lens designers?

Started Sep 13, 2012 | Discussions thread
FFS Senior Member • Posts: 1,757
Re: Olympus lens is 3x heavier, twice the price

Andy Crowe wrote:

How about $800 12-60 at 4.0 vs 12-35 at 4.0 then?

The Olympus 12-60 is for sure a nice lens, but has some funky mixed distortion at the wide end,

Funky distortion at the widest end, yes, but much, much less distortion compared to 12-35 over the whole range. Adding to that is distortion not a problem with the ZD if you shoot raw. Olympus Studio or Master does auto correction, all that is needed is click the the auto correction box and all the raw files in the batch would be processed to jpg already corrected. Distortion in 12-60 also disappears at 18 mm, while with 12-35, you'll have barrel at 12mm and pincushioning at 35mm.

There is PTLens if jpg correction of 12-60 is needed, which some say even does a better job than the Studio and Master.

a fair bit of CA and according to isn't as sharp either.

CA is less in 12-60 at 1.3 pixel average vs 1.6 - 1.9 pixel. Low MTF is caused by low sensor density, it is a 5 year old lens that is evaluated on an old sensor. It is the problem of Imatest, that's how it works: MTF value is not valid across different sensors.

What do you think of the dpreview review of 12-60 and the 2 verdicts of photozone?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow