> Does anyone have practical impressions of the MC 50/1.2?
I got one new about 3 years ago and I find it to be one of the better
Zuiko lenses that I own. It's almost always mounted on one of my bodies.
Apart from the amazingly bright viewfinder that it gives you (you really
have to see it to appreciate it!), the picture quality from it is quite
impressive. I find that it provides excellent contrast and colour balance
and very good resolution. In comparision, the 50/3.5 macro has better
resolution (as to be expected) but doesn't appear to have as good contrast.
I hardly ever shoot the 50/1.2 wide open and usually use it in the f4-f11
range.
> Dare I ask, does it compete in any way with the Leica F/1 or F/1.2
> Noctilux's? (May Oscar Barnak have mercy on my "sole" <gg>.)
Sorry, never tried a Noctilux.
> Comparison of the Zuiko 50/1.2 vs. the 50/1.4 (MC only)?
I used to have a 50/1.4 many years ago and I find the 50/1.2 to be a far
superior lens. The 50/1.4 definitly has a "soft" look to it when compared
to the 50/1.2. I'm not sure if my 50/1.4 sample was MC or not but I think
it was SC. At that point in time I didn't know the evils of MC vs SC and
shamefully used my time to take pictures instead of searching for an MC
version :-)
-mark
< 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 >
|