> David Irisarri <div2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> IMHO 50/2 is more versatile than 35/3,5. I have got a ZD 50/2 and is
> superb for portrait and macro purposes. Hair-raising resolution and
> contrast but also a creamy sharming bokeh. You can read about both
> lenses here:
>
I'd agree, last Saturday I did some comparison testing of 50s on my E-300. I
haven't analysed them in detail but it's obvious the ZD 50/2 was at least as
good in resolution and better in bokeh than anything else I tested.
This is the list:
ZD 50/2
Z 50/1.4 s/n 800K
Z 50/1.8 s/n 3M
Z 50/3.5
Z 35-105 @50
Nikkor 35-105 @50
Nikkor-S 50/1.4
Nikon E 50/1.8
Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5 (old pre-AI)
Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5 (AI)
The Zuikos had better bokeh than the Nikkors.
...Wayne
Wayne Harridge
http://lrh.structuregraphs.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|