At 9:13 am -0800 17/2/98, George Ling wrote:
>Referring to 50mm lens non-MC vs MC (non-green to green), and type 1
>through type 5.... would the serial number delineate from non-MC to MC,
>and/or demarcate from one type to another?
>
>If yes, who might have that information?
On the basis that George, Larry and Gary will automatically delete all of
these messages unread, I now feel able to revive my 50mm lens serial number
table - hurrah, hurrah. (Sing cheerful little tune here and polish glasses
in trembling anticip p p ...pation).
Hey, these things are important to us right? OK then, here we go:
Here is the list for the 50mm f1.8, and a few other comments which you may
find useful. The only fly in the ointment is that John H has identified
about five different builds of the lens, and I bet you can't tell them all
apart from looking on the outside!
OK here is the Zuiko f1.8 survey:
*******************************************************************
Zuiko 50mm f1.8
So far we have:
1. silver front ring, F.ZUIKO, serial number 703474 at front (not MC)
2. black front ring, F.ZUIKO, serial number 1082880 on front (not MC)
3. black front ring, F.ZUIKO, serial number 1670346 on front (?)
4. black front ring, no more F.ZUIKO, serial number 1885780 at the side (MC)
*******************************************************************
Anyone else who would like to help narrow down the serial numbers
please send 'em in.
What we're looking for:
1. Higher numbers
2. Lower numbers
3. Higher numbers
4. Lower numbers
So to answer your question, (1) is the original design
(2) & (3) is the first re-design
(4) is the final re-design and current lens
There ARE differences in image quality obtained using the three lenses.
These differences would probably not be detectable on a 6"x4" print, so
no need to worry unless you regularly print larger sizes (as I do).
Joseph Albert wrote the following which may also be useful:
re: 50/1.4 vs. 50/3.5...
I have owned 4 50/1.8's at different times, I recently acquired the 2nd
50/1.4 I have owned, and I also a little less recently acquired the 1st
50/3.5.
my overall ranking of these lenses for sharpness at *infinity* f/5.6 and
smaller is:
1. 50/3.5
2. 50/1.8
3. 50/1.4
and of course in the close focus range, the 50/3.5 wins hands down as well.
at open apertures, things are different. at f/2 and f/3.5, I think
the 50/1.4 is the best. at f/4, all three are too close to call with the
methods I use (tape a piece of newspaper to the wall and shoot tech pan or
velvia with camera on a tripod).
so, only get a 50/1.4 if you plan on shooting at f/1.4 and f/2. otherwise,
you'll save some money and get an overall better lens with a 50/1.8, but
the 50/3.5 makes a very nice standard lens if you don't need wide apertures.
for nature photography, hands down it is the one to get as the macro
capability will come in handy. for a lightweight hiking kit, I plan
to carry a wide angle + 50/3.5 macro + 100-200/5-- I used to do this with
a 50/1.8 but the 50/3.5 will be more useful. .
Hope some of this has been useful interesting and fun - Gary really enjoyed
it at the time but just didn't like to admit it. Behind that up front
image is a man who has a lot of DATA and loves it ;-) ;-)
All the best,
Clive http://clive.bel-epa.com
############################################################
| This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
| To receive the Digest version mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "subscribe olympus-digest" in the message body.
| To unsubscribe from the current list mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "unsubscribe olympus" in the body.
| For questions mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html
############################################################
|