Folks
I dug out my big black OM System Lens Handbook last night. It is the
October 1985 edition (marked C24E-Oct.1985 in the back) and has the 100
f2, 180 f2, 250 f2 and 350 f2.8 lenses but not the 90 f2 macro.
Anyway, I've discovered a few interesting things. Most lenses are
specified as "multicoated" but there are a couple of exceptions:
Zuiko 8mm f2.8
Not specified as being multicoated in the book, nor is multicoating
mentioned in the accompanying text (page 110).
Zuiko 50mm f1.8
This is not specified "multicoated" at all but the accompanying text
(page 136) says "...further aided by the benefits of multicoating..."
which I take to mean that *some* of the glass-air surfaces are
multicoated, others are not. This lens would be engineered for maximum
cost performance (make cheaply) in which case judicious use of mc would
be expected.
Zuiko 200mm f4
Not specified as being multicoated in the book, nor is multicoating
mentioned in the text (page 148).
Zuiko 300mm f4.5
Not specified as being multicoated in the book, nor is multicoating
mentioned in the text (page 152). Of interest is the note "the front of
the lens features a luxurious 4-elements in 3-groups construction, with
a combination of high refractive index glass and extraordinary partial
dispersion glass to greatly reduce chromatic aberrations."
Teleconverter 1.4X-A
Teleconverter 2X-A
Both of these are specified as "(multicoated)" ie, multicoated in
bracets. While the 2X mentions nothing about multicoating, the text
accompanying the 1.4X says "of the eight lens surfaces coming into
contact with air, six are multicoated to minimise alterations in color
balance and dramatically cut down flare."
---
We know how good many of these mentioned lenses are -- the 200mm f4 lens
gets a good test report in particular and the 1.4X is a gem -- despite
the fact that they are not necessarily "multicoated." I take this as
indication that Olumpus really knew what it was doing with lens design
and didn't just throw all the elements into the coating pot just because
mc was trendy at the time. The quote "multicoated to minimise
alterations in color balance" indicates to me that mc is more than just
reducing flare and internal reflections. I for one am biased towards
real-world lens test results and bugger what the specs say. I've put the
200 and 300mm lenses on my shopping list.
Hope this was interesting.
Vaughan
PS: I'm in Sydney Australia and seriously in the market for Olympus
gear, after a year of self-denial. ;-) Even my wife is sympathetic!
I'm after an OM1n, 28 f2.8, late 50 f1.4 or f1.8, 135mm f2.8 initially,
later augmenting with 18 f3.5, 200 f4 and 300 f4.5. Of course I'd be
tempted with an OM2n but not interested in the 2sp, 3 or 4. I don't have
money for all at once. Looking around Sydney there is a bit of stuff but
it's all a bit scruffy and/or way overpriced.
PPS: I have a rubber 55mm slip-on hood for Zuiko 21 f2.0 in box (box is
a bit squashed) and will swap for hoods for 50mm and 28mm f2.8. I no
longer have the 21mm lens, sorry. <sob> I also have the 250 film back
and darkroom loader (no reels though) for anybody interested. Asking
prices around here are AUS$500 which is silly money, if interested I'd
prefer to trade.
Vaughan Bromfield
Education Consultant
Information Technology Division
University of Technology, Sydney
Australia
tel:
< 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 >
|