Erwin Voogt wrote:
.
> One of my favourite and highly under estimated lenses is the Zuiko
28-48/4.
> It is a lens that only gets B's in the SQF.
Erwin, you can test yourself your own lenses.
If you test side by side the 28-48 on 28 mm vs the 28 f 2, both lenses on f
5.6, for instance, you can have your own conclusions.
> How is it possible that a professional magazine measures the lens as one
of
> the best zooms they have ever seen (in the 80s), with a resolution
> outperforming almost every commercial film and even outperforming (in some
> ways) the Zuiko MC 50 mm F1.8, while it is a lens with only B's...?
I have all the test of the british "professional magazine" Amateur
Photographer of the Zuiko lenses and I don´t agree with their results on a
lot of lenses. This magazine says too that Zuiko 35-70 f 4 is better on 50
mm than the Zuiko 50 mm f 1.8. Watching my own tests I can say this is no
true. (Even, I don´t need to watch any test...)
> My conclusion:
> Every Zuiko is an excellent lens.
> Just take pictures instead of waisting time on discussing which Zuiko
> performs better than the other!
> Erwin Voogt
> Utrecht, The Netherlands
Erwin, we take a lot of pictures and waist time on discussing.
After a lot of years collecting test of the Zuiko (and other brand) lenses
from some magazines I can tell you there is much more valuable information
on the Gary Reese tests than on a mountain of internatinal foto magazines.
Ángel Lobo.
CUENCA (SPAIN)
< 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 >
|