Andre Goforth wrote:
>
> Matthias wrote,
> >
> I took one slide film with an old Zuiko 75-150mm. In my
> >opinion, this lens is a phenomen. Why? It is an very old version with
> >chromium ring. It contains 15 elements, which are only single coated. And
> >my specimen even has in at least one group (clear) streaks. One would
> >expect flary results from such a lens, but the opposite is the case, the
> >definition is very good, the colours are vivacious and the contrast is
> >good. The sharpness is almost comparable to prime lenses even at full
> >aperture. How is this possible?
> >
> >Matthias
>
> Don't really know other than my 75-150 is a very good performer too. I just
> find it a bit long nosed. John Hermanson commented a while back about
> seeing 16 by 20 blowups by a pro photographer in the 70s who used this
> lens. They were top notch. Its is kinda weird how non technical and cheap
> setups can get great results. I've got a hand held shot with a Zuiko 300
> f4.5 blown up to 12 by 14 that is very nice. The kicker is the ASA of the
> film. Kodak 800. There was lots of light as this was at a daytime ball game.
>
> Andre
>
I've had one of these for almost 20 years and have used it a lot until
recently. It is works quite satisfactory, until one tries to work
in back lit conditions. Then the flare sets in with a vengance. 15
elements and single coating just don't work very well in such conditions.
Apart from that it works fine, although the zoom mechanism may be worn
in the old versions, turning them into varifocal lenses.
Happy new year
Lars
--
Lars Haven <mailto:lhaven@xxxxxxxxxxxx> http://isa.dknet.dk/~lhaven
"When writing about women, one must dip one's pen in a rainbow"
D. Diderot
< 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 >
|