Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 80 macro, etc.

Subject: Re: [OM] 80 macro, etc.
From: Dawid Loubser <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 18:02:41 +0200
Ed, the 80/4.0 Macro will likely beat the pants off an Apo Rodagon at  
1:1, since that (and similar enlarging lenses)
are not optimized for 1:1 work? However, at 10:1 the enlarger lens  
will surely whip the Zuiko 80mm. (but I don't
think the Zuiko 20mm f/2.0, since both lenses are apparently kind-of  
diffraction-limited at open aperture, so
the f/2.0 lens will always win). Of course, the image field being  
photographed will be much much smaller with
the 20mm, so comparison would be difficult. Also, the Zuiko macro  
lenses can get away with pretty small image circles,
whereas a Rodenstock enlarging lens has to be capable of huge image  
circles (for huge prints). It's not easy to
make a lens of the same quality with such huge image circles, I imagine.

There is also at least one account of the zuiko being better than the  
Apo Rodagon 1:1 75mm f/4 lens
here: http://photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00H25k (although it's not  
a very scientific test, admittedly).

On the matter of cost / construction: I am a regular user of a  
Rodenstock Rodagon 80mm f/4.0 enlarging lens, I can also
assert that the Zuiko 80mm f/4.0 (manual version) appears to be built  
to a much higher mechanical standard than the
german enlarging lens. And both lenses are 6-element designs. I don't  
think we should assume that the more expensive
german optics should be better. This goes to many aspects of the OM  
system. For example, tests claim the Zuiko 50/1.8
to out-resolve any Leica 50mm Summicron, and it was less than a tenth  
of the price new.

For example, an Olympus double cable release is built like an  
expensive, priceless jewel compared to the (much more
expensive) Linhof cable release that I use for my Technorama. In fact,  
cool as the technorama is, an OM-1 is
just plainly built better in terms of finish.

Now, I get the point of your post, and we should not get all lyrical  
just because of Zuikoholism, but this is
why I would like to get some hard numbers on the resolution of the  
80/4.0 Macro at 1:1. I am going to
perform my own experimentation in anyway, but I wanted to draw on  
pervious experience to aid my expectations
in terms of the print sizes I could achieve with ultra-fine-grain B&W  
film for a pet project of mine.

Common wisdom seems to have it that there really are not many 1:1  
lenses that approach the 80/4.0, and
all that I really want to know is whether the 80/4.0, like the 20/3.5,  
is diffraction-limited (or near that)
at wide-open aperture.

keep well,
Dawid


On 02 Oct 2009, at 3:26 PM, Sawyer, Edward wrote:

> I would think the Apo Rodagon 75/4 enlarger lens would be better.


-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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