Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: a "Bad" 50mm vs. New 35-70

Subject: [OM] Re: a "Bad" 50mm vs. New 35-70
From: miaim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 05:49:22 -0500
Rich mentioned keeping an older OM 50mm lens so his kids could one-day
compare it to today's lenses.
When I first got a very unlamented brand new OM-2000, it came with a new
35-70/f3.5-4.8. I did some tripod mounted test comparisons of that lens
against an F.Zuiko Auto S 50mm with a serial number in the 1,442,XXX range
that I picked up for $20. The test prints and slides were of stained glass
artwork, and even the clerk in the drugstore where I picked up the prints
could tell the difference in the amount of very noticeable and important
detail that was simply missing from the all too crappy prints from the
mostly plastic 35-70. I've since disposed of the OM-2000 and it's totally
junk lens, and given up on drugstore prints. But even after getting other
50's (1.4 and macro), I keep the old 50/1.8 largely because of what I've
seen it do in the above example. It's one of my most used lenses.

Mike Swaim

< 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>
  • [OM] Re: a "Bad" 50mm vs. New 35-70, miaim <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz