On Mon, 13 Dec 1999 12:22:36 -0800 (PST), Joseph wrote:
>====================================
>Take another look:
>
>200mm f/5 Zuiko (single-coated)
>
>Vignetting = A
>Distortion = slight pincushion
>Aperture Center Corner
>
>f/5 B- B-
>f/8 B B-
>f/11 B+ B
>f/16 A- B+
>f/22 B+ B
>f/32 B B-
>====================================
>Second, the lens isn't very sharp until f/11 as these numbers show.
On that we disagree. Remember that Gary cautions againt interpreting
his results as significant on partial grade levels. A B- lens may nor
be presumed to be inferior to a B+ lens
> A
>lens with moderately low contrast that has to be stopped down to f/11 to
>sharpen the corners is not a very good lens.
And strangely, my shots with the 200/5 are very sharp at all
apertures.
A Tamron 200/3.5 can do better
>than this, and the 200/4 Zuiko (which is sharp by f/5.6 and produces images
>with high contrast) is much better.
As several subscribers have noted from their personal use, magazine
lens tests, and other private lens tests, the 200/5 consistently
shows up as an excellent lens, fully comparable to the 200/4.
I'm not sure why the 200/5 is such a burr under your saddle, and I'm
willing to concede that you didn't like your lens. Maybe you just had
a bad one. However, a search of the list archives will show that the
200/5 users here have gotten excellent results from this lens, and
test results support the conclusion that it is fully comparable to
the 200/4. Further, its small size and economical price tag make it
suitable for use when the "quality at all costs" 250/2 isn't an
option.
BBB
-
B.B. Bean - Have horn, will travel
bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Peach Orchard, MO
http://www.beancotton.com/bbbean.shtml
< 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 >
|