>On 28 Sep 98, at 14:49, Joseph Albert wrote:
>
>> Another case is the 50/1.8 which went through several renditions of
>> optical formula, and the 24/2.8 which has versions with different numbers
>> of elements, or the 85/2 which has both 6 element and 5 element versions.
>>
>> Purchase of zuiko lenses used is a veritable minefield if you care about
>> which version of the lens you get, as they are not marked in any way
>> to determine it.
>>
>You may not be able to narrow it down to one version, but knowledge of the
>various markings can help, especially if there are only two versions. ie: An
>early lens marked "E.ZUIKO" has five elements. But my 85/2 doesn't have
>the letter code, nor the MC marking, so I'm not quite sure which version
>it is,
>or if it's MC or not. I thought I read that the E.ZUIKO code preceeded the
>use
>of "MC", and that a lens with neither of these markings would be newer yet,
>and by definition, MC (multicoated). Or was this discussion only in reference
>to the 50/1.8? I'm still not certain if my 85/2 is MC or not. (It's S/N
>20563x)
>
>
>
>Shawn & Janis Wright
>swright@xxxxxxxxx
It is MC, but how many elements does it have? Hmm.
Winsor
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|