>2) How do the Nikkor and Zuiko optical qualities compare? (I find Nikkor
>less than thrilling...but that's because I owned Leicas for years until a
>family illness forced the sale of my modest collection).
That quetion was addressed by Herbert Keppler in the December 1978 (I
believe) Modern Photography. His conclusion was that it had nothing to
do with the quality of the lenses - it was the ability to critically
focus the competing camera systems. He gave the nod to Nikon at that
time.
That was before 2 series screens from Olympus. It was also before
Olympus improved their lens coating across the board. But Nikon also
underwent their share of improvements.
To ask that today requires lens to lens bench test comparisons under
totally controlled conditions. Don't go there, because in the end you
will find that there are variations in individual lenses arising from
construction tolerances, as well as variations arising from the amount
of misuse any given lens has received! Also, don't go there because it
raises more questions than you can ever answer. Where do you stop, with
Nikkor vs. Zuiko? Or Hexanon vs. Zuiko? And what about comparison
mismatches, like a 20mm to a 21mm, or a f/3.5 vs. an f/4 lens? Or
variations due to the camera body selected. On and on it can go.
Now that I have said "don't go there," I should add that collectively we
have to an extent. In the process, we have learned that (esp. for tripod
based picture taking):
1) Mirror lockup isn't the holy grail of maximuming lens performance.
It also takes stopping down the lens a few seconds before the actual
picture is taken, a task well accomplished on some cameras when you use
their self-timer (including the Olympus OM-PC, OM2S, OM4(T)(i) and the
Nikon FE/FE2/FM/FM2).
2) Camera and lens stability is a bigger issue than the optical design
of a lens. The finest Zuiko optics will ill perform if they yields a
wobbly combination on an OM body.
3) There are evolutionary changes in the design of certain Zuiko lenses
(e.g., the 50mm f/1.4) that had significant implications in image
rendering quality.
4) Filters can rob image performance at wider apertures, even if they
look perfect good and are a major brand.
5) Filter ring dings can decenter elements and cause performance loss.
6) Careful selection of a focusing screen to match a lens can allow a
much easier focusing effort and a more precise focusing.
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 >
|