I know that some of the P&S are quite sharp even with Zoom lens. But
the Zuiko 37-70/4 should be okay although I didn't own one. Since both
Modern Photography and Gary's test shown it is a good lens. What is
the condition of your 35-70/4? Many Zuikos are very old, they properly
need some cleaning.
I have came across five 35-70/3.6, all of them were very dirty inside,
some lens element's surface are fog but cleanable, I still own four,
two are cleaned and perform very well, very sharp especially at 70mm
position. Two are un-repairable due to element separation. Still
looking for cheap damaged lens for parts.
Regarding over exposure, it will wash out slide but not easy for
negative, normally they will bring higher contrast. But I didn't know
what will happen if they are severely over exposed. I recommend you
have a look on the Zuiko to see if it is crystal clear.
C.H.Ling
Ray Moth wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> You might be interested in the following [unintentional] comarison I
> .......
>
> The light conditions were similar but the camera settings were probably
> not. With the OM-2S, I was able to set the lens aperture (which I
> generally set at f4-f5.6) and shutter speed manually, using spot
> metering on the face of the subject. With the Leica P&S, I had no idea
> what aperture and shutter speed the camera selected but I could at
> least 'lock' the exposure and focus settings by centering on the main
> subject and pressing the shutter release button halfway, then composing
> and taking the shot.
>
> I usually use one or the other of these cameras for a shoot and don't
> normally compare results. This time, however, I did and I was
> surprised. In both sets of pictures, exposure and focus were correct
> for all shots. Contrast and sharpness were excellent from the Leica but
> only average from the Olympus. In the Olympus photos, flare was
> sometimes noticeable but not intrusive. With the Leica, however,
> excessive flare ruined several of the shots. I had expected some flare
> but not as much as I got from the Leica!
>
> Maybe the reason for these results could have been that I forced the
> OM-2S to over-expose, by using spot metering under those conditions?
> This might have caused the flare to be less noticeable because
> over-exposure causes the emulsion in negative films to be 'washed out'
> and lacking in contrast. On the other hand, maybe the Leica exposed the
> film less, which would give better contrast and could make the flare
> more noticeable? Anyway, I think I'll avoid back-lit scenes with zoom
> lenses in future.
>
> By the way, can someone tell me if the 35-70 f4 is considered inferior
> to other Zuikos int the same zoom range? I've noticed before that this
> lens seems a bit "soft" and not very contrasty but that it actuallly
> produces nice portraits fully open at 70mm setting. I'm thinking of
> changing it for a couple of primes: maybe a 50 and a 135, since I
> already have a 28 f2.8 and often feel that the 70mm offered by the zoom
> is not long enough. Any comments?
>
> Regards,
>
> Ray
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com/
>
< 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 >
|