The september issue of the german "color foto" lists lens test results
going back 10 years, or so.
Seems the much lusted after 35-80 2.8 didn't hold up too well compared with
3 Leicas and a Zeiss, in spite of costing more than all but one: Zuiko =
(73.4 points, "good") and 3100DM (1500 dollars?)
Leica vario elmar 35-70 4.0 = (84.8 points, "outstanding")
and 1950DM (975 dollars?)
In fact, of the 5 manual focus standard zooms tested, it did worst. What
gives?
The much lusted after 350 2.8 scored 3rd best (90.1 points, "outstanding")
of 4 big glass lenses tested in '94. It was bested by the Nikon 400 2.8
(91.4, "outstanding"), and the Leica 400 2.8 (95.7 , "superior"). It tied
with the Leica as being most expensive(20,000DM). Right behing the zuik,
was the 400 5.6 Canon (87.1 points "outstanding") - and the Canon costs a
paltry 3300DM!
Interesting is that those seldom lusted after AF Zuik zooms have pretty
decent tests scores.
You can order from color foto the test magazine issues per email:
bestellservice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
frank, berlin
< 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 >
|