Hi Richard:
I can't give you any data on the 90 mm f/2.0 Macro, but I can give you the
Popular Photo test results of the 100 mm f/2.8 versus 2.0 In summary, the
f/2.0 only provies a minor improvement 2/3rds out and a significant
improvement at the far edge, probably due to astigmatism <f/8.0 in the 2.8.
Wide open the 2.0 excels, as expected from an ED element. The 2.0 has much
improved flare levels (0.65% versus a high 1.6%). Neither lens has any
distortion. What wasn't tested was close-up performance. I'd expect the 2.0
to shine here, given the floating elements. Sorry that I can't relativize
these like I did for the Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro. There are no ranges reported
in Pop Photo. The prices are for a Shutterbug advertiser who happened to have
all of them in stock and at nearly the same condition.
Now the slit image contrast numbers:
Olympus Zuiko 100 mm f/2.0 ($425US 9+ condition)
Center f/2=67, f/2.8=74, f/4=76, f/5.6=80, f/8=79
1/3rd out f/2=69, f/2.8=70, f/4=75, f/5.6=78, f/8=79
2/3rds out f/2=66, f/2.8=69, f/4=71, f/5.6=75, f/8=74
Far edge f/2=69, f/2.8=71, f/4=70, f/5.6=69, f/8=70
Olympus Zuiko 100 mm f/2.8 ($175US 9+ condition)
Center f/2.8=70, f/4=74, f/5.6=78, f/8=79
1/3rds out f/2.8=65, f/4=70, f/5.6=76, f/8=79
2/3rds out f/2.8=60, f/4=61, f/5.6=67, f/8=69
Far edge f/2.8=59, f/4=60, f/5.6=61, f/8=60
Now, for the benefit of Contax affectionatos, versus the 100 mm f/2.0 Planar
T*, which is worse at large apertures and better at small apertures, also has
no distortion, and 1.0 0.000000lare:
Carl Zeiss T* 100 mm f/2.0 ($1295US 10- condition)
Center f/2=61, f/2.8=72, f/4=80, f/5.6=81, f/8=81
1/3rd out f/2=65, f/2.8=70, f/4=80, f/5.6=82, f/8=81
2/3rds out f/2=61, f/2.8=65, f/4=74, f/5.6=81, f/8=80
Far edge f/2=60, f/2.8=61, f/4=70, f/5.6=74, f/8=75
Versus the Canon FD 100 mm f/2.0, with 0.5 0.000000lare, and no distortion:
Canon FD 100 mm f/2.0 ($395US 10- condition)
Center f/2=55, f/2.8=74, f/4=79, f/5.6=80, f/8=80
1/3rd out f/2=55, f/2.8=71, f/4=80, f/5.6=80, f/8=80
2/3rds out f/2=55, f/2.8=67, f/4=80, f/5.6=81, f/8=76
Far edge f/2=60, f/2.8=65, f/4=70, f/5.6=74, f/8=71
Incidentally, the 90 mm Summicron-R f/2.0 has poorer results than any of
these, especially wide open!
Moral of this story: 1) there wouldn't be much money left for gas to get out
and shoot with the Contax lens, 2) one might find the Canon lenses more easily
(and at a bargain price?), than could swap (plus a few bucks?) for a slower
moving OLY equal (the 100 mm f/2.8 Canon was $145US, 9+), and 3) there is a
hidden gain from the Close Focus Aberration Correction employed only in the
Oly f/2.0, which isn't quantified here.
If we had Color Poto tests posted for at least one of these lenses, we might
be able to make comparisons to the 90 mm f/2.0 macro Zuiko.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|