Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] New guide to OM Zuikos

Subject: Re: [OM] New guide to OM Zuikos
From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 16:41:41 -0800
I sorta agree with their assessments, but would take issue with a few
choices. But that's mostly because of my own personal preferences and
photographic aesthetic.

In this day and age where we're mostly adapting lenses to digital
cameras, I think there are a few standouts that make the effort
worthwhile. Of my kit, this would be my take right now for use on the
Sony A7 II:

21/3.5: Sharp lens, but requires extensive work to correct the
vignetting. Usefulness is limited by effort required. Good for limited
application.

24/2.8 SC: Sharp lens on film. Flare prone. I loved the lens so much I
literally wore it out. Replaced it with the MC version and never
looked back. I believe the MC version also corrects some distortion.
For digital application, I doubt I'd recommend the SC version at all.

24/2.8 MC: This lens "seems" sharper on film than digital, but
otherwise is pretty decent. Still has some of the vignetting issues of
the 21/3.5, but it appears that the actual useful area is about the
same as the cropped 21/3.5. On the Four-Thirds cameras, this lens
really performs almost perfectly. As to flare, the MC blacknosed
version is VERY much better. I have to do more work with this lens to
determine the characteristics on the A7.

28/2: What's to say? Just get one. Some vignetting, but easily
addressed. Doesn't work well on legacy Four-Thirds cameras as there is
hot-spotting in the middle of the image.

28/3.5 SC: The lens was really sharp enough, but I didn't care for the
vignetting (on film) and it just didn't feel right to me. I much
preferred the 35/2.8 and 24/2.8 lenses.

35/2: Oh, momma! Sharp? Uh huh!  However, there are some bad optical
habits that need to be broken. But it is an absolute Bokeh Monster!
There is no other lens like the 35/2.

35/2.8:  Probably one of the best film lenses ever. Doesn't perform as
well on digital as the background does get nervous. Otherwise, an
amazing lens. I think the later blacknosed ones are definitely the
best. I need to experiment more, as I think this lens may have a
digital sweet spot of usage that I haven't found yet.

50/1.4 MC/MIJ: Portrait Central! An amazing lens when shot at any
aperture, but the character of the image changes dramatically as a
Double-Gauss design should. Must have.

50/1.8 SC: Doesn't rock my boat. I never liked this lens on film. It's
not any better on digital. Body cap.

50/1.8 MC/MIJ: Very nice lens. I personally like the 1.4 better, but
the 1.8 has the sense of being sharper.

100/2: What's to say? Just get one. Perfection. But it is heavy.

100/2.8: The mid-range 118-132000 serial number series is of an
unusual design. VERY sharp, slightly warm, and less contrast as the
later version. Sharper than the early range, not as contrasty as the
final version. I would definitely recommend the 100/2.8 as an
alternative to the 100/2. No kit should be without either the 100/2 or
100/2.8 MC. If I didn't already have my "perfect to me" 100/2.8 and
100/2, I'd snag a last series 100/2.8 MC without hesitation. I've used
Joel's and we did some comparisons. Honestly, I liked mine better for
some things, but his better for others. I think mine does better for
close-ups, his better for landscapes.

135/3.5: I don't have this lens anymore and I really have absolutely
no desire to get another. The focal length is just wrong and the image
is quite flat to me. But the 135/2.8 MC is actually an awesome lens in
nearly every way except for that focal length thing.

180/2.8 MC: I don't have this lens, but have used Joel's. As much as I
like the 200/4, I'd much rather have the 180/2.8. The contrast is
exceptional.

200/4 SC: I love the 200/4 lens. But I would recommend the later MC
version. On film, this lens seemed to always be affected by
aperture-vibration issues with the OMs. Not an issue on digital. This
lens is a nearly perfect performer on full-frame or crop-sensor
digital.

200/5 SC: It's like the 50/1.8 SC - a body cap.

300/4.5: Again, the MC is slightly better, but the SC is no slouch.
When it's sharp, it is VERY sharp. However, there is a lot of
purple-fringing that can ruin images. But repairing that is a single
click away in Lightroom. Non-issue most of the time. This lens
performs VERY well on the OM bodies and full-frame digitals. It's less
impressive on legacy Four-Thirds bodies. Seems to be good on the
Panasonic DMC-GX85, though. On the Canon 6D, this was my favorite
lens.

AG Schnozz
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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