Y'all...
I recall that a while ago there was some discussion of testing the
suitability of some cheap wides for use on DSLR's, 'specially Canon
EOS cameras.
Well, on Monday I had an evening gig shooting some stills of
musicians who were on a soundstage faking performances for a
5-camera video shoot. I figured that the lighting would probably be
taken care of, and for various reasons it seemed like a good time to
shoot with a DSLR (which I don't own...) So on the way to the gig I
stopped by the studio of another photographer who was quite happy to
lend me a D60 for a coupla days. He was pretty amused to find out
that not only had I never shot with a DSLR. I hadn't even shot with
an EOS film camera before.
Next stop was Fotodiox for an adapter; the company headquarters just
happened to be on the way to the gig, which was about 70 miles
northwest of my condo in downtown Chicago.
So, I had time to seek out a good place to get my fingers wet with
the unknown axe; this turned out to be a place called Chain O'Lakes
State Park. I tried to find something to shoot with my 24mm 2.8
Vivitar T-mount:
http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/41135954
Also shot some well-lit trees with my 180 (1st version)
http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/41136180
Not to mention some Sand-Hill Cranes with the 400 Telyt:
http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/41135855
All the images have been resampled into small JPEG's with a bit of
the usual sharpening - not what I would consider any sort of
rigorous test but a good real-world view of how the stuff works
together. If anyone needs to see the 2K x 3K files (which looked
quite good to me) I'll be glad to pass them along. In any case,the
24 looked quite good to me (stopped down to 5.6-8, anyway.)
I suppose I need to find out how best to post images for evaluation.
Any suggestions about how big, sharpenig/no sharpening, resampling,
etc. would be appreciated.
