Subject: RE: [OM] Zuiko Zooms
>
>My thanks to Lars and Gary for replying to my post about the 35-70mm zooms.
>
>I had already consulted the lens tests at
>http://www.astro.wellesley.edu/lhawkins/photo/photo.shtml, as Gary
>suggested, and was surprised to find the S.Zuiko f/4.0 showing better
>results than the Zuiko f/3.6, particularly in terms of contrast. This was
>one of the reasons that prompted me to make the post (also, there's no info
>on the f/3.5 - 4.5 version).
>
>Is this just another case of "you can't trust lens tests", or does the
>humble f/4.0 really outperform the f/3.6?
>
>Roger Davies
>Lisbon
>Portugal
>
Roger,
Am looking forward to reading about Gary's tests on the 35-70s. I have had
all three at some time but did no scientific tests. In terms of image
quality including distortion, a subjective rating is as follows:
35-70 f3.6
35-70 f4
35-70 f3.5 to 4.5
However, the f3.6 is heavy and forget servicing it due to its hundreds of
bearings. The f4 is lighter and gives good results. The f3.5 to 4.5 is
the lightest and hard to beat for backpacking. Never have understood
exactly why the f4 is always cheaper on the secondhand market.
Which gets most use? Why the 35 to 80 f2.8 Tamron SP of course :-) Reckon
it would give the f3.6 close competition, costs significantly less than all
three Zuikos and has portrait abilities. Probably weighs the same or as
little more than the 3.6.
The 65-200 f4 Zuiko is also an excellent lens which I would not be without
- and I hate zooms ;-)
All the best,
Clive http://clive.bel-epa.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|