02-11-2013, 08:26 AM
[quote name='Sammy' timestamp='1360568335' post='21889']
Potka comparing the general performance of the 2 lenses:
"As can be seen 60mm lens is slightly better at f/2.8 but loses to 50mm starting from f/5.6." Also "actually 60mm lens has better contrast than 50mm lens, whose contrast is relatively low by latest standard."[/quote]
No, this quote is not the "general performance" assessment, these 2 sentences are from the center crops comparison. And the center performance is very good, as with most MFT primes, no one argues that.
The edges are a different story though, pictures show it better than words:
![[Image: Testitaulu%2050mm%20macro%20vs%2060mm%20...0581001881]](http://www.pekkapotka.com/storage/Testitaulu%2050mm%20macro%20vs%2060mm%20macro%20kulmat.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1350581001881)
And this edge performance comparison is followed by a different comment:
"Here´s why I started this blog with a negative remark. 60mm Macro is not as brilliant as an allround lens as the 50mm Macro is. Corners are weaker at normal shooting distances."
Potka comparing the general performance of the 2 lenses:
"As can be seen 60mm lens is slightly better at f/2.8 but loses to 50mm starting from f/5.6." Also "actually 60mm lens has better contrast than 50mm lens, whose contrast is relatively low by latest standard."[/quote]
No, this quote is not the "general performance" assessment, these 2 sentences are from the center crops comparison. And the center performance is very good, as with most MFT primes, no one argues that.
The edges are a different story though, pictures show it better than words:
And this edge performance comparison is followed by a different comment:
"Here´s why I started this blog with a negative remark. 60mm Macro is not as brilliant as an allround lens as the 50mm Macro is. Corners are weaker at normal shooting distances."