Dear All,
My statement that "the Zuiko 50/1.4 SC lens is a dog" seems
controversial. Perhaps my comment was too sweeping but, honestly
folks, my particular example of this lens is not good at all. It seems
to bear out Gary Reese's poor test results for this lens, at
http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default.htm
Performance at f/1.4 was D in the centre and C- at the edges. (C =
"Soft" images that cannot withstand much enlargement - suitable for
snapshot quality images (5x7"). D = "Smudged" with obvious image
defects in even small degrees of enlargement, not suitable for most
users (only 3.5x5")).
It was not until he got to f/4 and smaller apertures that the
performance became acceptable (B- or better). This is no good for a
lens intended for use in poor light! It also means that definition wide
open is too poor to achieve accurate focusing. I actually find it
easier to focus my 50mm macro lens, despite its much smaller max.
aperture of f/3.5
I am aware that the MC version of the 50/1.4 (serial # > 1,100,000) is
a superior lens; it appears, from people's comments, that there are
good SC examples too.
Regards,
=====
Ray
"The trouble with resisting temptation is
you never know when you'll get another chance!"
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.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 >
|