Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] (Fwd) .... MC and non-MC lenses ...

Subject: Re: [OM] (Fwd) .... MC and non-MC lenses ...
From: Pauls0627@xxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:29:57 EDT
In a message dated 8/12/99 5:25:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
cnocbui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

> what's the difference between a lens marked with and without the letters =
>  "MC" ? is it true that non-MC lenses are poorer in optical quality ?

First not all, perhaps most, MC Zuiko lenses are *not* marked MC. Of the 170 
lenses identified as MC on the SC/MC list (see Lee Hawkin's site) 91 are 
*not* marked MC, and 79 are marked MC. As a general rule if a lens is marked 
with a single character followed by a period before the word "Zuiko" (F. 
Zuiko, G.Zuiko, etc...) then the lens is SC. If it just says Zuiko (or 
possibly S Zuiko with no period after the S) then it is MC. There are a 
couple of "stragglers" on the SC/MC list that don't seem to follow these 
rules, but I expect they may be due to submitters misidentifying the coating, 
or possibly the lens has had the front ring replaced with one that is marked 
differently.

As for MC lenses being superior in optical quality, the only observation I 
can make is between 50/1.8's. I have 3 of them, one is single coated. Under 
extreme conditions (shooting into the sun, for example) the MCs do a much 
better job in regards to flare. Otherwise I see no significant difference 
between them on my slides. I wouldn't hesistate to buy an SC Zuiko (I presume 
most of us would not hesitate to buy any Zuiko...)

Paul Schings
Coventry, Rhode Island USA

< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz