Olympus-OM

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] What do you think?

Subject: Re: [OM] What do you think?
From: Nathan Wajsman <photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 21:44:50 +0200
I’m with Moose. I think YouTube is mostly garbage. When someone asks a question 
in a FB group and the answer is a YouTube link, my usual reaction is to wonder 
if the person posting the link is illiterate.

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.frozenlight.eu
@nwajsman.bsky.social

Слава Україні! Героям слава!







> On 4 Sep 2025, at 18:56, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 9/3/2025 3:56 AM, wayne.harridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7AhnbS_10U
> 
> Already an error before 2.5 minutes in. He assumes his 35/2.8 is multi-coated 
> from a black front ring, "one of the later Olympus black nosed lenses". BUT, 
> the ID ring is G.Zuiko and the serial number is 208187, an early, single 
> coated lens.
> 
> Either ID ring or outer ring is wrong, probably a repair result. Any of us 
> old hands could tell from internal reflections what it actually is. At a 
> guess from the reflections in the video, I guess old, SC. So perhaps a bent 
> filter ring replacement?
> 
> I skipped over to his "My Five BEST Vintage Lenses - UPDATED!"
> 
> His second is:
> 
> "It's a fairly humble looking and feeling little thing. It's the Konica 40 mm 
> f1.8. And
> this is such a beautiful lens that again I'm going to have difficulty 
> explaining
> just how nice it is. It's absolutely gorgeous. I used this lens for street
> work primarily, but it's also great for general work as well. There's just
> something about a 40 mm lens that on full-frame cameras, on a 35 mil film
> camera or a full-frame digital camera, 40 mm just works. It's special.
> It does something magical. There's just something about the relationship of 
> this focal length to this full frame 24x 36
> mil I think it is that just works beautifully. "
> 
> This lens is also a member of my vintage film lens menagerie. I've not shot 
> it much, as the initial images just didn't much interest me. I do notice that 
> the bokeh in his examples doesn't do much for me, but did I miss something? 
> Ah well, perhaps when I get home I'll look at it again. But - top five lenses 
> - Nah.
> 
> Warning, more reactions may follow . . .
> 
> Disagreeable Moose
> 
> -- 
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> -- 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
> 

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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>
  • Re: [OM] What do you think?, Nathan Wajsman <=