Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] new to the group

Subject: Re: [OM] new to the group
From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" <cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:19:02 +0200
Hello Kathy, and welcome to the list!

Judging lenses is not only a technical issue -- there's also a BIG
artistic/aesthetic component... it could be described as 'image style',
which may or may not fit your preferences, no matter how good or bad the
lens could be (technically speaking).

That said, I'd like to share my experience with my most used Zuikos. I'm
*sure* many people here will disagree with some of my opinions, but again I
think this is a rather subjective issue. Here we go:

-21/3.5: Technically, not the best below f/5.6, but nice pictures though.
Compact and lightweight. Reasonable flare control (mine is single-coated).

-28/2: *Great* lens, not too big. Sharp and contrasty, at f/2 there's a
clear loss at the corners, but still takes *very* nice pictures. Somewhat
"cool" (bluish) colours.

-28/3.5: I like it. Slower->dimmer viewfinder, but great performer. Same
compactness as the 21mm.

-35/2: I don't like it. Quite soft wide-open, improves when stopping down,
but still seems "odd". Worse handling than the 28/2.

-40/2: Outrageously expensive, but I like it -- the focal lenght is perfect
for me. Somewhat softer at f/2, but takes *beautiful* pictures. The
smallest Zuiko, has some handling problems.

-50/1.4: those with serial nos. over 1100000 (actually seems to be 1085xxx
or so) *are* better -- slightly sharper and *much* richer colours. For
critical performance, best from f/2.8-4. The one marked 'MC' takes great
pictures too. On the other hand, I've been very impressed by a
non-yellowing silvernose 50/1.4. Quite fast, but a bit heavy.

-50/1.8: although I've got several types, the latest 'made in Japan'
variant is the most used. Compact size and great all-round performance,
though contrast is in the low side. Many of the 'MC' type suffer from
sluggish diaphragms.

-50/3.5 macro: high contrast, rich colour. Great flare control. Reasonable
size and good handling, but a bit slow for general use.

-55/1.2: *very* soft wide open, great at f/2 and superb at f/2.8 (higher
contrast than the 1.8 and 1.4). Big chunk of glass ;-)

-80/4 macro: Obviously, the *best* for copying slides. Impressive contrast.
Quite specialized lens, though.

-85/2 (silvernose): I love it. Sharp enough, takes *sweet*, beautiful
pictures. Great for portraits. Fast and rather compact, who needs the
100/2.8 anymore? (stir, stir, stir :-)

-135/2.8: Feels bigger and heavier than its 3.5 brother. Excellent picture
quality, good for teleconverters, smooth portraits at f/2.8 (nice). Good
flare control (MC).

-135/3.5: I like it becuase of its compactness. About the same quality as
the 2.8 version at comparable apertures, but contrast may suffer -- it's
quite flare prone.

-35-70/3-5-4.5: Tiny and incredibly lightweight zoom. Superb quality
pictures, even wide-open, rivals the latest 50/1.8 -- but with *higher*
contrast. Reasonably good flare control and quite convenient close
focusing. Unless wide-open, it behaves as a constant f/4.5 zoom -- great
for non-TTL auto flash, but dim viewfinder.

Hope this helps. Best regards,

...

Carlos J. Santisteban

<cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<http://cjss.galeon.com>



< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz