Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] MC vs SC

Subject: [OM] MC vs SC
From: Pschings@xxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 10:35:51 -0400
With all the discussion about what lenses are MC vs SC, I thought I'd try to 
summarize a little.

FIrst off, general rules. All of these assume there hasn't been a front ring 
change due to a repair, in which case all bets are off.

1. Lenses marked "MC" are MC. Obviously.
2. Lenses marked "F. Zuiko" (or G. or H...)are single coated. Don't confuse 
this with lenses marked S Zuiko (no period after the S), which are "budget" or 
"consumer" lenses. Actually I'm pretty sure all of the S Zuikos are MC because 
they are all later designs
3. Lenses marked just "Zuiko" with no leading character are MC. I think this is 
a pretty reliable indicator, since even the earliest fast wides dropped the 
leading "F." (or "G." or "H."). For example, my low serial number 24/2 
(silvernose) is marked as such.
4. Lenses I believe were never MC: 28/3.5, 55/1.2, 135/3.5 I thought the 
75-150/4 was never MC, but I'm not so sure after Lee's recent post.
5. Lenses I believe were always MC: 21/2, 24/2, 28/2, 28/2.8, 50/1.2, 50/2, 
90/2, 100/2, 180/2.8, 250/2, 250/2, 28-48/4, 35-70/3.6, 35-70/4, 35-70/4AF, 
35-70/3.5-4.5, 35-70/3.5-4.8, 35-80/2.8, 35-105/3.5-4.5, 50-250/5, 65-200/4, 
70-210/4.5-5.6, 85-250/5, 100-200/5, 20/2 macro, 38/2.8 macro, 135/4.5 macro
6. I've never seen a Zuiko that had green reflections and definitely wasn't MC. 
I've also never seen a Zuiko that didn't have green reflections and was MC. 
Admittedly there are people out there that have seen a lot more Zuikos than I 
have.

If anyone has a lens that seems to violate these rules I'd be interested in 
knowing about it.

Paul Schings

< 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