Scott, the chart is fascinating. I realize that this information is almost
anecdotal, as opposed to scientific, but it is still interesting reading. I
personally skewed the charts a bit, as it was a period where I have
significant 'inventory', so quite a few duplicates were in my collection.
Not a problem anymore.
Just some random thoughts:
- As a group, we own more 18/3.5 lenses than 21/2 lenses. That surprised
me. It is probably reflective of the fact that we own a lot of 21/3.5
lenses, so the 21 focal length beats out the 18 focal length.
- More 40/2 than 50/1.2. Not many of either
- Only a handful of 90/2 Macro lenses. That surprised me, given its
reputation. More 100/2 than 90/2, which also surprised me.
- Over 4:1 200/4 vs. 200/5. Given the 'small/light' OM mantra, I thought
more people would have the 200/5. I remember a thread where many people
chimed in with positive praise of the 200/5 (including me). I guess all of
us did <g>.
- The 35-70/4 outnumbers the 35-70/3.5-4.5 12 to 8. Perhaps the biggest
surprise of the data. Only two 35-80's doesn't really surprise me, but I
suspect it comments more on 'not everyone submitted their data' than
anything else. Lots of people clearly like the 35-105 though.
- One stinking 50-250 (yes, mine). Come on folks. Other people own this
lens.
OK, none of those observations mean anything, but they were fun.
Tom
From: "Scott Gomez"
> I had a little time on my hands last evening, so I played a bit with the
> lens coating data as originally compiled by Paul Schings. The results (two
> charts) I've added to my "Lens Coating" introductory page, here:
< 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 >
|