John,
You are right, the 85/2 performs very well wide open, you have to look
carefully to find out the different between wide open and stop down
and the slightly soft at f2 look pleasing. The 50/1.2 is a bit
disappointed at f1.2 (the image is not solid, some unpleasant look,
like double images?), resolution is very good at f2 (distance object),
but fall off is still noticeable. The 55/1.2 look much better in this
area, less fall off, image at f1.2 is fine, at F4 it has very high
resolution for distance objects. If not due to the warm tone, I
wouldn't sold it. For 50 now I use the f1.4 and f3.5 macro.
Also, please don't overlook the close focusing correction mechanism, I
think 85/2 will perform better at close distance than the 50/1.2. I
have tested different versions of 50/1.4, a 50/1.8, 50/1.2, 55/1.2,
21/2, 50/3.5 at around 1:15 F4, the sharpest one were 50/3.5 and 21/2.
All other 50s had similar performance, slightly soft.
C.H.Ling
John Hudson wrote:
>
> At 01:31 PM 15-01-01 Monday -0500, you wrote:
> >Don't omit the 85/2 automatically because the 50/1.2 is so good. The 85 is
> >amazing. And how are you going to get a tight head shot with a 50?
> >
> >George S.
> I picked up an almost mint condition 85/2 right after Christmas. It's now
> my preferred lens. Compared to the 50/1.2 it performs much better wide open
> and stopped down at least two stops. Images on my 85/2 wide open and at 2.8
> can barely be differentiated from those at 5.6 and 8. Simply an amazing
> lens. Wish I had one earlier.
>
> John Hudson
> Vancouver, BC
>
< 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 >
|