The second article is online. It covers our lens choice, testing method, processing, and motivation.

I've started to upload some of my test images, so they will be here tomorrow.

There are always more lenses. One of the objectives of this is to end up with fewer. May just be against the laws of physics.

We may have to do another test of Zeiss versus Leica. First we have to finish this one though!

In the meantime, I have five articles on my blog. This search should find them.

The lens takes beautiful photos!

I am sure I cannot speak fully for Robbie but here are some:

1. We are having fun with our tools.

2. We prefer to have some idea which tools are better than others. Rather than just flailing about in a pool of subjectivity.

3. We need to sell lenses and would like to know which to keep.

4. We might learn something from the responses we get back from other photographers.

5. We like challenging our own expectations. Don't you like challenging yours, John?

I am not sure what subject people would prefer. Flowers have areas of texture, fine detail, and subtle tonal gradations. They have enough structural complexity to evaluate bokeh. They have areas easy to pinpoint for consistent focusing. They sit still. And people do take pictures of flowers!

Some background on our working methods, in advance of the full article. It's good to see comments and criticisms. We'll do our best to fill in information.

Robbie did the Pentax APS-C shots using live view at x10 on a K-5. I did the Olympus MFT shots on an E-PL2, also using the LCD at x10.

The shot was inside with no wind or disturbance. Light was completely diffuse and consistent, since we had an Irish overcast day. I have blinds on either side of the room to adjust for glare control. Once set I didn't touch these. There may be slight (1/3EV) highlight burns in the extreme edges of the frame, but otherwise no overexposure.

Underexposure is another matter since Pentax exposure consistency is, quite frankly, crap. Everyone who has used a K 50/1.2 knows this.

We used my Feisol tripod to ensure consistency through apertures on a given lens. There was slight frame movement as lenses were changed. There is no practical way to avoid that and neither does it matter much, if every shot is manually focused.

Our focal point was the stamen of the flower, the top left anther to be precise. DOF was so thin that sometimes the whole anther was not in focus at the same time!

I can't speak to the ultimate accuracy of our focus ability. We did not take multiple shots so we could select "the best" since no-one is paying us to do this and we also wanted to hang out and talk crap.

The Leica Macro-Elmarit has a mount fitted but I am not sure if it is Leitax brand. I bought it that way.

Unfortunately -- slaps self about head -- I forgot it in a drawer so we didn't test with it!

We did use six other lenses on two different camera systems. Considering we're not fanatical about this sort of thing (ha ha!) that seemed plenty.

Sure, can do! Do you have one you don't need?

Yeah, it's true. I over-estimated my audience. Maybe next time I'll just grunt, point, and throw in a few emoticons.

f/2.8. No way could you get a shot that nice at f/1.2.

Indeed. It's obvious when looking at a range of shots.

The idea was to get a contrasty look with that set, which isn't going to appeal. But no, nothing is burnt out. I am a maniac for exposing within latitude.

It's good to get feedback on what people like. My purpose was only to show decent stuff from both lenses. And of course to ensure the continued fame of Schweppes on the web.