Hello Richard:
You could do like me and get a 50 mm f/2.0 Macro and call the questions about
the 1.2, 1.4, and 1.8 a mute point. Well, OK, one could still wonder about
the 3.5 versus the 2.0 Having used both of them I'd say that the f/3.5 and
f/22 aperatures are soft on the 50 mm f/3.5 and that the f/2.0 is a gem at any
setting or distance.
I've always bought the early production (non-MC) 50 mm f/1.8 because I'm a
believer that the critical 1/3 to 2/3 of the way from center area is sharper,
at the expense of the center and the corners. Later designs seemed more even,
but I don't think evenness is a virtue. Most of the subject matter on a area
basis is 1/3 to 2/3 of the way out!
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
############################################################
| This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
| To receive the Digest version send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "subscribe olympus-digest" in the message body.
| To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
| listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe olympus" in the body.
| For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| htttp://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html
############################################################
|