Well, to come back to the 50mm F/1.4 - F/1.8 Comparison:
I´ve done some test shots with my SC-variant 1.4/50 to a 50mm/F1.8 'made in
Japan' lens.
A reason for the test was that the exposure meter gives only 1/3-Stop advatage
of the F/1.4 lens.
This would make the F/1.4 lens dispensabe.
I`ve shot a poster in my room with in manual mode. At F/5.6 the exposure of all
slides were undistingushalble from the reference 50mm F/3.5- Macro set to F/5.6.
But a side by side compariosn of the wide open shots showed that the
F/1.8-variant was
about 1/6-F-stop underexposed whereas the shot with the F/1.4 lens was about a
1/6-stop
brighter than the F/5.6 reference slide.
I guess this difference is caused by a different lever-adjustment. Now all
slides are exposed
accurate enough, the difference is only visible when side by side compared, so
nothing to worry
about. But now I know where the f-stop difference is gone, and that the real
speed difference
is about 2/3-F-stops how it sould be.
Frieder Faig
On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 11:22:39AM +0200, Abbinga wrote:
> Hi Angel,
>
>
> Did you check all the aperentures by the 1.4 vs 1.8 overexposure comparison
> or only some?
> I assume that you had the same camera and the same shutterspeed used with
> the comparison
>
> Ab
>
> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> Van: "Ángel Lobo" <angel.lobo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Aan: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Verzonden: dinsdag 17 oktober 2000 20:25
> Onderwerp: [OM] Zuiko 28-48 --- 50 1.4 vs 1.8
>
>
> > Hello all.
> >
> > After some tests with two items of this little zoom 28-48 f 4 I can say:
> >
> > 1.- The zoom 28-48 underexp. 1/3 on 35 mm vs 35 f 2 or 35 f 2..8.
> >
> > 2.- The zoom 28-48 underexp. 1/2 stop on 28mm vs 28 f2, 28 f2.8 or 28
> f3.5.
> >
> > 3.- The zoom 28-48 read the same light on 48mm than 50 f1.8 .
> >
> > Reading the light over the same scene one Zuiko 35 mm read an amount of
> > light and this zoom 28-48 on 35mm setting read 1/3 more of light, when I
> > adjust for the correct exposure on the zoom shoot, I´m taking one picture
> > underexposed 1/3 (more dark).
> >
> > I have this suspicion long time ago and after test two of this little zoom
> > side by side I can say that both zooms do the same way , and I guess this
> > is a problem worse than a zoom engraved f4 and working as a zoom f 4.5.
> The
> > big problem is that the zoom is not a real zoom with automatic diaphragm,
> > giving underexposed pictures.
> >
> > I thing is very rare nobody on the Oly List (where are some very good
> > friends of this little zoom) say never somethig concerning this matter.
> >
> >
> > On the same chapter of problems, testing my 4 lenses 50 mm 1.4 vs my 4
> > lenses 50 1.8 I can say that "ALL" my four different lenses 1.4
> overexposes
> > 1/3 vs "ALL" my four different lenses 1.8. ( And versus some other Zuiko
> > lenses as the zooms 35-70). Maybe this is my reason for write some times
> on
> > the list that I prefer some lenses 50 1.8 than the lenses 1.4. I can see
> on
> > the pictures taked with the 1.4 lenses (usually the more moderns MC items)
> > a plus of light that I interpret as a bad look of the pictures.
> >
> > One more time, my surprise is that all the four lenses 1.4 ( SC Chrome, SC
> > Black, MC<1mill. and MC>1mill) give the same reading of light and that
> > nobody -neither- say something concerning this matter on the List.
> >
> >
> > Ángel Lobo.
> > CUENCA ( Spain ).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > < 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 >
> >
> >
>
>
> < 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 >
>
< 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 >
|