Concerning fast Zuiko Macro 90/2 and 50/2 I found that at long distance (a
34 floors building at around 50m from my house, it is my always testing
target), 100/2 has higher resolution than 90/2 at both F2 and F4 and my
newly acquired 55/1.2 has higher resolution than the 50/2 when both at F4.
Usually I test two to three apertures only, so there is no data at other
apertures, last time the bright light not allow me to shoot at F2 for the
55/1.2. The above two Zuikos Macro I once own (yes both sold) were in mint
condition so I think the result was not affected by dog lenses. I bought
both macros only because they are the largest aperture macros in the world
(at their focal length) and the price was good.
Actually I like the shots from 50/3.5 more than the 50/2, although the
shots from 50/2 looks sharper in most cases. While the 90/2 and 100/2 are
very similar in taste. Are there anyone have more input on the two
legendary Zuiko Macro?
C.H.Ling
----------
> From: George M. <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] fast macros
> Date: Friday, March 12, 1999 1:01 PM
>
> kelton wrote:
> >
>
> > OK! OK! Stop, already! You sold me on the fast macros! (Dang!) And here
I was thinking that with such a reasonable bunch of people, I might get a
few kind souls to say, "Nah, save your money, you don't really need macro
glass that fast." You people just won't be happy till every last dime is
spent on pricey über-Zuikos, will you?
> >
> > --Kelton
> >
> >
>
> Why should you be any different? :>)
>
> George
>
> PS: A 50/3.5 is a fine macro lens if you can't afford the 50/2
>
> < 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 >
>
< 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 >
|