At 22:37 3/18/02, George S. wrote:
Josh,
I don't want to be negative here, but IMO, finding out what lenses are
most popular won't show you anything, because many of us have many 50 1.8s
[snip]
So, my point is, sheer numbers will not prove that one lens is the most
popular, since many of us did not set out to collect as many 50 1.8 lenses
as we now have in our posession.
IMO, you should ignore all 50 MMs.
Best,
George S.
I agree with George with couple different twists to it. I believe the
numbers will be skewed by the relative population sizes of certain
lenses. George mentions the 50/1.8 Standard for good reason; the
population size of this lens is immense. Olympus made a Googol of
them. These have outlived many, many of the "consumer" OM-10 bodies they
were originally sold. The OM-10 and its successors are usually scrapped
because they're not economically repairable (except perhaps the
OM-PC). The cost of a CLA/overhaul is very nearly the cost of simply
replacing it with another in EX or EX+ condition.
One of the other ubiquitous lenses is the 75-150 f/4 Zoom. This was one of
the "trilogy" Olympus heavily marketed with the OM-10 and its sister
bodies. The other two are the 50/1.8 (shouldn't be a surprise) and the
28/3.5 WA until it was replaced with the 28/2.8 WA. Perhaps the 28/3.5
isn't quite as common because it was discontinued after 7 years with the
introduction of the 28/2.8 WA in 1981, about a year after the OM-10 was
introduced. OTOH the 75-150/4 continued from 1974 to 1985; another four
years in the high sales numbers (for bodies).
Among those with a low population (I won't say they are "rare"), but
"unsatisfied" high demand are the 21/2, 90/2 Macro and 100/2
Telephoto. These three immediately come to mind; there may be a couple
others. I have deliberately excluded the truly rare, e.g. 40/2, as they
are supply/demand anomalies.
During the height of OM production, then as now, many owners spent their
money on a more expensive camera body and bought lower price point lenses
to put on it. I've met several OM-2S and OM-4 owners who did this,
including quite a few of their lenses being made by companies such as
Tamron, Tokina and Vivitar.
IMHO:
Buying a high price point body and putting low price point lenses on it is
a backward approach; the *lens* is more important. However, a lens
manufacturer's name and its speed are not read by others nearly as easily
from a distance as the big bold print of the body model. There's a
psychological factor with many non-pro camera owners who want the blatantly
visible "brag" factor of a high(er) end camera body. It's especially
rampant among first-time buyers. This doesn't mean *all* the non-Oly
lenses are no good. There are a few legendary designs. This effect does
skew lens populations and will affect your numbers.
[Note: this list is *different* and does *not* represent the general
non-pro 35mm-SLR-owning population. It's much more discriminating about
bodies and lenses with *much* higher experience and technical knowledge
about how to make excellent photographs, including a higher percentage of
(semi-)pro users. Look at the ADITL and TOPE galleries. Participate in a
forum or a photography class loaded with "young newbies." It becomes very
evident very quickly.]
-- John
< 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 >
|