Hi Jan:
This is a subject partly covered here in the middle of March, 1998. I proved
Lee Hawkins with the Popular Photography data on the 40 mm f/2.0 Zuiko. You
will find it at:
http://www.astro.wellesley.edu/lhawkins/photo/pop-photo-zuiko-tests.txt
The 40 mm is a great performer at the far edges when compared to 35 mm lenses
(performs like a 50 mm there). It's also not quite up to the center through
2/3rds out values that are common for 35 mm and 50 mm lenses. That boutique
lens is commanding prices why out of sync with its original price, even
adjusted for inflation. Hawkins Web site has more info on that.
Lee didn't post the data for the 50 mm f/2.0:
50mm f/2.0 Macro MC
Actual: 52/2.08, Distortion: none
Centering: near-perfect, Flare: 0.45%, Transmission: 95%
Percent contrast of 0.01mm slit image at infinity:
Center 1/3rd out 2/3rds out Far edge
2.0 69 (99) 58 (97) 50 (100) 51 (98)
2.8 73 (90) 61 (81) 59 (100) 55 (92)
4.0 80 (94) 79 (93) 65 (93) 69 (92)
5.6 85 (100) 84 (98) 70 (91) 76 (94)
8.0 84 (100) 85 (100) 76 (96) 80 (99)
Percent contrast of 0.01mm slit image at 1:2 magnification ratio:
2.0 60 47 38
30
2.8 68 54 40
31
4.0 69 60 50
40
5.6 70 69 55
45
8.0 77 71 65
55
Actual focal length: 40mm
Note: The figures in parenthesis above are the percentages of the maximum
values reported by any tested lens in this class (by any manufacturer) up
through April, 1984.
I posted an analysis that showed the 50 mm f/2.0 Zuiko to be the equal of the
50 mm f/2.0 Leitz Summicron-R (1984 vintage). Popular Photography had a
"shootout" of 50 mm lenses in the late 1970's which included test results for
the 50 mm f/3.5 I don't have a copy of that and no one has come forth with
it. (If anyone has it, I can make work up the percentage of maximum values
data like I've done above). But memory of that test (and experience!) tells
me that for macro shooting from f/2.0 through 5.6, the 50 mm f/2.0 is
superior. The 50 mm f/3.5 is significantly poorer at f/22 than at f/16 (which
isn't offered on the f/2.0 lens). From f/8 to f/16 you wouldn't see a
difference between these two lenses!
I long to have my 50 mm f/3.5 again. It is petite and shares the 49 mm filter
thread - not one of your concerns. Presently I'm out of room in my vest for
the fatter f/2.0. IMHO, there is a place for every 50 mm Zuiko made. None of
them are totally replaceable. Be forewarned that prices are presently very
low for the 50 mm f/3.5 Macro. I just saw one go for $116US in 10 condition.
I have my eye on one for even less.
Yes, the 50 mm f/2.0 is presently available new.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
cc: e-mail
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|