Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Performance of Zuiko 40/2

Subject: Re: [OM] Performance of Zuiko 40/2
From: "Richard F. Man" <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 19:08:38 -0700
At 12:54 PM 4/20/2002 +1200, you wrote:
Hi folks,

Richard wrote

>  I mean the Zuiko 40/2 is known to be an OK but not a stellar performer?

It shows up pretty well in Gary's tests with the OM4T & prefire. A and A+ at
smaller apertures. That's about as good as it gets. And it has 4 of the 6
elements are special low-dispersion glass.

But C/C+ at /2? That's the point of getting a /2, isn't it? Lets see..., at /2
21/2 .... B+/C
24/2 .... C+ / C w/ mirror up, prefire...
28/2 .... B / B
35/2 .... B, and C- at corner
40/2 .... C / C
50/2 .... C / C <-- wow! That low?
85/2 .... C+ / C+ --- B+/B- w/ mirror up, prefire
90/2 .... B+ / A <-- whee, no wonder it's so good :-)
100/2 ... C+/ C+
180/2 ... A/ A- <-- WOW!
250/2 ... A / B+ <-- wow!

OK, so I was assuming incorrectly that at wide opened, the performance will not be generally much worse than /2.8, /4, but looks like Cs are the norm, or average, or is it "mean"? Arrghh...

Looks like the 180/2 and 250/2 though, are just outstanding. May be I will sell one of the cars (ha ha, a joke).

(OT) how was the holiday??

Brian

< 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 >

// richard http://www.imagecraft.com
[ For technical support, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ]


< 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