Re: [OM] Comparing 50 mm lenses

Subject: Re: [OM] Comparing 50 mm lenses
From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 09:58:48 -0600
The contrast difference between the lenses is something that I've
harped on for many years. I haven't brought it up for a while, but
there was a very specific reason why I liked my old silvernosed lenses
with the older coatings. The reduced contrast of the lenses were a
better match to my preferred film of Fujichrome Velvia. Also, they
gave better shadow definition on my B&W films. Now, with digital, I
get a greater effective DR in the image than with the newer,
contrastier lenses.

These differences aren't so important to me anymore as shooting Velvia
is such a minor part of my total. With my current film choices and the
fact I scan most everything, it's a simple matter to adjust curves to
match most everything--as long as the original capture was contained
with the DR range of the capturing medium.

But for B&W films, I really do still prefer the older lenses. Also,
very specifically, I happen to absolutely love the tonal curves that
the 35/2.8 SC and 100/2.8 SC give me. They also have a slight warming
cast to them which de-blues the image a touch.

Within my digital universe, I use the PanaLeica 14-50 lens. Compared
to the DZ 14-54mk1 it replaced, it is MUCH contrastier. Compared to
most of the older Zuikos, it is also much contrastier. It is much
easier to get blocked-up shadows and blown highlights with this lens.
The 100/2 is also the same in this regard. Even the latest version of
the 50/1.4 is similar.

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>