Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Plastic lenses; was: Sigma lenses

Subject: [OM] Re: Plastic lenses; was: Sigma lenses
From: "Roger D. Key" <rdk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 16:27:50 +0100

I was referring to the 3.5-4.5 S-series lens, not to the later Cosina-made
3.5-4.8.

Many list members have expressed a preference for the 3.5-4.5 due to its
low weight, compact dimensions, close focus, and sharpness. It sounds
likely that it was introduced as a companion to the double-digit OMs and
the OMPC (OM-40).

Roger Key



GeoW wrote:

Hi Roger,
Perhaps you mean the 35-70/3.5-4.8 as being the Cosina lens. The
35-70/3.5-4.5
Zuiko still feels a bit plastic to me and it's my opinion is that it was
designed to be
marketed along with the OMPC as one sees so many of this combination up for

sale/auction. The OMPC being rather plastic in it's own right.
F8,
GeoW

On 2 Mar 2004 at 9:16, fred42@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

>
> Hi there Roger,
>
> The lens you mention is not an Olympus design as far as I know. It is
> made by Cosina for Olympus. It was also made for Nikon F mount, one of
> my students has on attached to her Nikon FM10 as a Nikkor branded
> lens. The Olympus version was introduced at the same time as the
> OM2000 which you probably know already is barely an OM. Both it and
> the FM10 (and FE10 too in fact) were made by Cosina and share the same
> chassis. Most of the current Voigtlander bodies made by Cosina also
> share a lot of trim/chassis parts from external views. Cosina have
> done a very good job of taking a no doubt reliable set of deigns and
> made a lot of packages around that frame. RF and SLR bodies and many
> different mounts (Lecia thread, Contax, M42, Nikon, OM to name just a
> few). Hope this helps.
>
> Dan S.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger D. Key" <rdk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2004 4:55 am
> Subject: [OM] Plastic lenses; was: Sigma lenses
>
> >
> >
> > I would think that, from the OM point of view, the most significant
> > 'plastic' lens is the Zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5. It feels a lot cheaper
> > than Olympus' earlier designs, but in practice gives excellent
> > performance. It might not hold up to professional (ab)use, but in
> > normal use it should last a lifetime(?).
> >
> > Roger Key
> >
> >
> >
> > Moose wrote:
> >
> >
> > Nevertheless, my point was about inexpensive plastic lenses in
> > general.I'm not advocating buying that particular one or arguing
> > whether it will be a good long term investment, or whether Canon was
> > wise or not. I was talking about perception vs. reality about the
> > optical performance of this type of lens design in general. (I could
> > argue that if a lens so obviously not suited for digital in theory
> > can perform rather well, one that is so designed should be even
> > better, but choose not to.) The Sigmas that started this thread and
> > are its subject are specifically designed for APS size and smaller
> > digital sensors.
> >
> > Moose
> >







The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus 
List Problem"

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz