On 3/24/2020 7:25 AM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
At 3/23/2020 10:03 PM, Moose wrote:
In my 5D days, I had a 17-35 mm zoom. at San Simeon, all but four of the shots in all
four of these sub-galleries were @ 17 mm. I wanted wider for most and REALLY wanted
much wider for the pools.
20 mm wasn't even all that wide in OM days, what with the 18/3.5.
Some on Fred Miranda are saying it may be closer to 19mm.
Some data from old Modern Photo reviews.
Brand Lens Nominal Measured Diff.
Zuiko 18/3.5 18 18.76 4.2%
Zuiko 21/2 21 20.15 -4.0%
Zuiko 40/2 40 41.33 3.3%
Zuiko 50/1.2 50 52.48 5.0%
Zuiko 50.1.4 50 50.94 1.9%
Zuiko 50/1.8 50 51.87 3.7%
Zuiko 90/2 90 90.44 0.5%
Zuiko 100/2 100 100.65 0.6%
Zuiko 180/2 180 180.57 0.3%
They may be referencing back to this review. Where else are they going to get
Modern's criterion for meeting specs was ±5%, as I recall. The problem with using point data like this is that there is
natural variation. Someone hoping for a 20 mm F2 might well end up with a nominal 20/2 that's actually 22 mm. Then
again, they will probably never know, be happy at how clever they were and enjoy the pictures they make with it. :-)
Perhaps as we get older, our perspective gets wider.
I don't know about your part of "we", and speaking only literally, I still
crave both the long and the short of it all.
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/