Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] IMG: Microcosmos

Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: Microcosmos
From: Dawid Loubser <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 17:09:44 +0200
Moose, I believe the 50/1.8 crosses an "acceptability" boundary for me,
my brother uses one as one of his primary lenses - has done so for
almost 4 years.

He's on his second one - the first one was dropped ever-so-slightly
(50cm or so) and on carpet, but still, the little plastic thing (which
he had owned from new, and was never abused) self-destructed.

This also allowed me to have a peek at its insides, never seen
such a simply or cheaply constructed lens, it's literally four pieces of
plastic (even the geared threads), with what seems to be very loose
tolerances (wobbly).

To be honest, if I wanted to use a 50/1.8 on a Canon EOS, I'd just stick
a Zuiko on it.

So, it produces results that count, but it's the least robust lens  
I've ever
used. If i wanted a cheap, small, fantastic Canon 50mm, even though it's
a bit slower, I'd use the 50/2.5 Macro instead, or the MkI version of  
the
50/1.8 which does seem to be a bit more robust.

Dawid

On 04 Jun 2010, at 7:31 AM, Moose wrote:

> On 6/3/2010 3:10 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
>> [BIG snip].
>> Canon's plastic fantastic 50/1.8 is a similar story, optically  
>> fantastic, but a cheap piece of junk otherwise. I find it  
>> interesting that the OM system didn't per se produce any badly- 
>> built lenses. Perhaps just a different era?
>>
>
> I'm always curious about the "piece of junk" epithet about this  
> lens. It
> seems to me to be better suited for some users than a more sturdily  
> made
> lens. What are your criteria? Mine are:
>
> 1. Excellent images. And it scores here.
>
> 2. Reliability. OK, so it's plastic, and rattles. Still, for an  
> amateur
> like me, it's the same as new a year or two later, and it's mostly in
> the bag with me. I don't use it often, but when I do, its done the job
> so far. For heavier duty use, harsh treatment or conditions, sure,  
> use a
> pro lens. But practically, even if it eventually gets broken, it's so
> cheap a replacement is no big deal (and I won't need to buy the hood  
> again).
>
> 3. There when I need it. It's tiny and weighs nothing, so I usually  
> have
> it with me. If I had the serious 50/1.4, I'd have it along less often,
> as it wouldn't fit where the 1.8 does and would add weight to the kit.
> I'm not interested in finding a bigger bag or leaving another lens  
> home.
>
> Moose

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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