![]() In microeconomics it is assumed that there is a full employment in the society which is not at all possible. It is based on unrealistic assumptions, i.e. Maintains stability in the general price level and resolves the major problems of the economy like inflation, deflation, reflation, unemployment and poverty as a whole. Helpful in determining the prices of a product along with the prices of factors of production (land, labor, capital, entrepreneur etc.) within the economy. Theory of National Income, Aggregate Consumption, Theory of General Price Level, Economic Growth.Ĭovers various issues like demand, supply, product pricing, factor pricing, production, consumption, economic welfare, etc.Ĭovers various issues like, national income, general price level, distribution, employment, money etc. Theory of Product Pricing, Theory of Factor Pricing, Theory of Economic Welfare. It assumes that all micro-economic variables are constant. It assumes that all macro-economic variables are constant. The branch of economics that studies the behavior of the whole economy, (both national and international) is known as Macroeconomics.Īpplied to operational or internal issues The branch of economics that studies the behavior of an individual consumer, firm, family is known as Microeconomics. Contents: Micro Economics Vs Macro Economics Here, in the given article we’ve broken down the concept and all the important differences between microeconomics and macroeconomics, in tabular form, have a look. There are two broad categories into which Economics is classified, i.e. Economics has been divided into two broad parts i.e. There are just too many things that can be slightly off for general conclusions to be drawn.‘Economics’ is defined as the study of how humans work together to convert limited resources into goods and services to satisfy their wants (unlimited) and how they distribute the same among themselves. With all due respect to Martins testing, I would be hesitant to draw many conclusions from single lens sample, single shot comparisons. It’s difficult to test and assess stringently, and so doesn’t get all that much attention. The Olympus 60mm f2.8 doesn’t get enough credit for its three different focussing groups! It is also an aspect where I suspect the 90mm f3.5 can be doing a really good job. Contrast differences at f8 in m43 is in this case probably down to differences in exact focus (extremely critical at close range, it really is a plane of focus) or how well corrected the lens is at different focussing distances. I know part of the trouble at high magnification is diffraction but I wonder if some lenses do much better than others comparitively (like % decrease is minimized) and if so, why is that the case? Or is it just a matter of the lens being overall better at high magnifications?ĭiffraction is independent of other lens flaws. But at f/8 and beyond, the lens falls apart, whereas that is not the case at normal distances like landscape. At high magnifications, lenses can show distinct optical problems not visible at low magnifications.Īs a case in point, I've found the Venus Laowa 50mm f/2.8X macro to be excellent at f/2.8 to f/5.6 past 1:1 magnfication. Direct shots of paper and details can tell you a lot about the differences between two lenses. ![]() Thanks! I think this kind of test is very useful. Postscript: I leave a focus stack with the OM-1 and the 90, 15 images at f/10 of an orchid flower that measures 15mm approx. ![]() It is not a very scientific test, but I have tried to do things carefully so that the comparison was reliable. Here there is a difference in favor of the 90, it seems that at large magnifications its behavior is better, while in normal use as a telephoto lens the image quality is similar between them. What we see are the ink-stained fibers of the paper. Next I took comparative images at a 1:1 magnification ratio, I leave an image of the enlarged area.Įach of the lines is 1mm wide. The two lenses behave similarly at all aperture values, although from f/16 the 90mm looks slightly better. ![]() I put two comparative images at f/8, one with a crop in the corner and the other in the center: I have marked in red the area that we will see enlarged to compare. In order for it to fill the entire frame, the camera with the 90 mm was located at 1.5 meters, and with the 60 I got up to approximately 1 meter. I have also added this little test that I will put here to the first contact that I uploaded a few days ago to Olympusmaniaįirst of all I leave an image of the template that I have used. My English is not very good, so I have asked Mr. Due to the conflicting information that is appearing, I have done a small comparative test between the 90 macro and the 60 to check the differences in image quality.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |