Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Zuiko 100/2.8

Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 100/2.8
From: timberwolf <timberwolf@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 07:41:19 +0000
Wrote Winsor Crosby:
>Are any of the Oly lenses dogs? From time to time I have heard references
>to a particular lens from another maker as one of their dogs and one to
>avoid. The only negative reference I have ever heard to an Oly lens is one
>remark in a mag that the 40/F2 lacked sharpness and contrast, but that does
>not seem to be born out by the enthusiasm on this list for it. If it were
>so bad I doubt people would suggest it as a substitute for the exquisitely
>sharp Leitz 35mm Summicron for street shooting. So with these questions of
>whether this or that Oly lens is good, should we decide which Oly lenses,
>if any, should be avoided like the plague and publish that on the list?

"Dog" is a relative concept. In general, Zuiko OM wide angle lenses have been
very superior (superior t N*k*n that is), while the fast standard lenses have
been too flarey to be generally useful, the 3.5 Macro is so sharp it hurts,
while
the long lenses  (above 100) have been acceptable, less acceptable the longer
they got. The 50--150 zoom was something of a dog (I owned one and sold it
quickly) but this was of course an early zoom design.

And then there are the lemons. When I bought my 35/2, I found that it had
such horrendous curvature of field that when I focused at infinity at center,
corners were at about 2 meters -- 6 feet! I returned the lens and was told
that one element hade been mounted in reverse ... What is the Japanese for
'Monday morning'?



Hälsningar/Regards
Lars Bergquist
Timberwolf Type, the independent
specialist in text typefaces - visit me at
<http://www.timberwolf.a.se/>



< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz