Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] DPReview on the "standard lens"

Subject: Re: [OM] DPReview on the "standard lens"
From: "Carlos J. Santisteban" <zuiko21@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 18:37:21 +0200
Hi all,


> From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 50mm has never been one of my favorite focal-lengths.  It seems to always
> be
> too long or too short.  I personally prefer the 35mm focal length as my
> "standard" just because it allows me to show my subject in its surroundings
> without distortion. You can also zone-focus it.  But does this have to do
> with it being closer to 42mm?  No, it just has to do with my own artistic
> preference.
>

I agree with AG -- 50mm is too narrow as "standard" for me. I tried some
good 45's (Yashinon 45/1.7, Tessar 45/2.8) but still isn't the field I want.
40mm does the trick for me, and I'm very happy with the results of the
ridiculously expensive Zuiko.

There's no magic with the 50mm focal. I think the definition of a "standard"
lens is a confrontation of subjective, artistic views and technical
reasons; 43.3mm is just a geometric reference. In SLRs, the flange-to-film
distance imposes additional restriction on the design of shorter focal
lengths.

Like AG, I think 35mm would be a better "standard" than the 50, but an SLR
35mm lens is forced to be a retrofocus design, much bulkier and of somewhat
inferior performance.

OTOH, the Russian Biogon-clone "Jupiter-12" (35/2.8 for rangefinders) is a
no-compromise design, with a huge chunk of glass at the back, getting really
close to the film (about 3-4mm, IIRC -- not suitable for Bessas!). I find
this lens to be, believe it or not, *too* sharp... yes, there IS such thing
as a "too sharp" lens.

The standard lenses for the oldest SLRs were more in the 55/58mm range.
Those introduced by Nik*n in 1959, together with the trendsetting "F" body,
were a 58/1.4 (not surprising) and a then rare 50/2. But this lens was
marked "S-Nikk*r" instead of "H-Nikk*r" of later versions -- that means the
older model is a SEVEN element design, instead of the typical six element
(like the Zuiko 50/1.8). In fact, it's a typical double-gauss plus a
negative element in front -- yes, it's a mild retrofocus design; it wasn't
easy back then to design a fastish 50mm with a flange-to-film distance of
47mm.

Cheers,
-- 
Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas
IES Turaniana (Roquetas de Mar, Almeria)
<http://cjss.sytes.net/>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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